ROYAL BALLET AND OPERA - new name for Royal Opera House

[bangorballetboy]

3 minutes ago, FionaM said:

Name changes are always difficult and take time to root themselves, particularly for patrons who have used the old name for decades.  We should be patient.  

Bristol is still struggling with the renaming of our main concert hall from Colston Hall (a slave trader .. won’t they all in that era) to the Bristol Beacon.  
 

It’s beyond me why it couldn’t have been ‘Bristol Concert Hall’ which describes what it is on the tin.   However I am getting used to going to ‘the Beacon’.  It is a unique name.  

 

I'm off to an event at the Conway Hall this evening - named after one of our more famous anti-slavery campaigners!

[Richard LH]

On 01/05/2024 at 10:19, FionaM said:

Re new logi

 

its modern and dyslexic friendly, being sans serif.  It will also stand out on large posters and flags.  
 

I also quite like the quirky ‘&’ and the elongated R in Royal.   They add creativity

I like the design too, having seen it now in few different contexts. Hopefully folk will grow to be pleased with it, or at least reasonably content.

[MAB]

11 minutes ago, FionaM said:

Name changes are always difficult and take time to root themselves,

 

I've never got used to Mariinsky.

[bangorballetboy]

Just now, MAB said:

 

I've never got used to Mariinsky.

🤣

[FionaM]

4 minutes ago, MAB said:

 

I've never got used to Mariinsky.

 
That change was in 1992 !!!
 

And it was Mariinsky from 1740s to 1935.   

It was Kirov only for the ‘short’ time inbetween in Soviet times.  
 

[bridiem]

32 minutes ago, bangorballetboy said:

I really don't understand what is so difficult here.  There is a body that owns and runs the Royal Opera House, including the administration of the three main cultural entities that perform there (The Royal Opera, The Royal Ballet and the Orchestra of the Royal Opera House, none of which are independent of the umbrella body).  That body is currently is currently called Royal Opera House Covent Garden Foundation and its brand name is Royal Opera House.  The only thing that appears to be changing here is the brand name of that body - everything else is staying the same.

 

That has indeed become clear, but it assumes a familiarity with the organogram (if such things still exist) of the whole ROH that most people do not possess. If many 'stakeholders' apparently did not even know that the ROH includes the RB, how likely is it that they would know that ROH is the brand name of an umbrella body that runs all the companies and is also the name of the theatre? It should all have been explained clearly, as you have done here. Perhaps they should get you to write their press releases/emails in future, @bangorballetboy!

[DrewCo]

4 hours ago, FionaM said:

 
That change was in 1992 !!!
 

And it was Mariinsky from 1740s to 1935.   

It was Kirov only for the ‘short’ time inbetween in Soviet times.  
 

I believe the moniker Mariinsky was given after the theater that was built in 1860--named for the Empress at the time (Maria Alexandrova). The ballet company's theater for much of the earlier period time was the Bolshoi Kammany Theater, although there were others. (Older theaters burned down a lot!)

 

I looked it up to double check and Britanica online says the ballet company--that is, the Imperial Russian Ballet--didn't actually start dancing in the Mariinsky until 1880 and became the resident company in that theater in 1889 which is when it started to be called the Mariinsky. (I can't independently verify, but seems a reasonable source...the company's own website only says that by 1885 they were dancing most productions at the Mariinsky. So it seems the name change would have happened more or less when Britanica gives it.)

 

But yes...names change!

Edited May 2 by DrewCo
Spelling; double checking information

[bridiem]

I emailed Alex Beard about this and he has reiterated that they expect the name change to help with public perceptions, advocacy work and their attractiveness to financial partners. So let's hope it does have this effect.

[alison]

 

After a few days off sick, coming back to all this week's news I'm feeling as though I've fallen down Alice's rabbit hole - or as if my medication has addled my brain a bit!  Nevertheless, I'll try and process some of this:

 

On 30/04/2024 at 15:10, Rob S said:

And why does the R in Royal look different to the R in Opera?

I think that's because the former is a "capital" uppercase and the other merely an uppercase?  I've certainly seen a distinction made this way before somewhere.

 

On 30/04/2024 at 15:14, Lizbie1 said:

I don't love it but it looks familiar, maybe I've seen similar on a poster from the 70s or something!

Yes.  I'm starting to think I've seen it - or something similar - on some of the "wallpaper" posters lining the corridor to the Amphitheatre.  I don't find it at all in keeping with the royal crest above it, though.

 

On 30/04/2024 at 17:20, bridiem said:

However I'm a bit surprised that the ROH found it necessary to spend time and money on this particular change right now, unless they see some financial advantage to it. Perhaps they do.

Yes, I wondered, too. After all, they're still complaining that they're desperately short of money post-Covid.  And brand redesigns usually don't come cheap - remember the ICI one last decade?

 

On 01/05/2024 at 08:02, San Perregrino said:

I suspect that ballet has been bringing in more money and/or audiences than opera in recent times and may continue to do so going forwards. 

Given the way the ballet prices have shot up - to the extent that some are now more expensive than opera ones - I wouldn't be surprised.  In fact, I have for a long time been wondering whether someone in Marketing has been going "Hang on, why do we price ballet so much more cheaply than opera?" (because the performers are salaried and not being paid high fees for guesting has always been my assumption).

 

On 01/05/2024 at 09:50, jmhopton said:

Thank you for this, Paco. I found it very interesting. Knowing nothing about opera or it's rep I just assumed from this season's evidence that the Opera's 17 (?) productions as opposed to the ballet's 8 (?) meant the opera were producing a much more diverse programme than the ballet; but apparently not.

Given that a lot of their main singers are brought in per production, and that the Chorus seems to have variable amounts of work to do depending on the production, I'd guess there's not the same concern about overburdening them as KO'H has expressed about the dancers.

 

On 01/05/2024 at 13:44, Blossom said:

Interestingly, based on a book I got hold of about the ROH a while ago, opera always seems to be the one which suffers during a downturn .

Unsurprising.  If you get a lot of corporates attending - which I get the impression used to be the case, at least - that has I think tended to reduce audiences during previous downturns.

 

On 01/05/2024 at 13:55, San Perregrino said:

in a talk this morning Alex Beard said that in a survey of 'stakeholders' in the ROH, i.e. civil servants, ACE, sponsors etc only 2 out of 5 were cognisant of the ROH being about more than opera. it beggars belief I know. however, this is a major motivator for the name change and rebranding with a view to raising the profiles of, amongst those who can influence or fund. all three entities; the Royal Ballet, the Royal Opera and the ROH Orchestra. 

Thanks, San Perregrino.  It does indeed beggar belief (or should, but these days I'm barely surprised) that people who are supposed to know about this sort of thing clearly don't   There seems to be so much ignorance about so many things now that were once taken for granted.

 

17 hours ago, bangorballetboy said:

I really don't understand what is so difficult here.  There is a body that owns and runs the Royal Opera House, including the administration of the three main cultural entities that perform there (The Royal Opera, The Royal Ballet and the Orchestra of the Royal Opera House, none of which are independent of the umbrella body).  That body is currently is currently called Royal Opera House Covent Garden Foundation and its brand name is Royal Opera House.  The only thing that appears to be changing here is the brand name of that body - everything else is staying the same.

That is by far the clearest and most concise explanation of the whole thing that I've seen - thanks, BBB.  Possibly the ROH could use it as a basis for clearly explaining the situation.

[JNC]

22 minutes ago, alison said:

Hang on, why do we price ballet so much more cheaply than opera?" (because the performers are salaried and not being paid high fees for guesting has always been my assumption)

when I did a tour of the ROH once, the tour guide explained the higher pricing for opera due to the sets being far more expensive than ballet sets. They said that ballet sets are mainly ornamental props/screens that don’t need to take the weight of people standing on them (think a painted backdrop).

 

Of course this may not be the only reason, and I hope I’m not misremembering as the tour was a few years ago now (pre Covid). I’m aware that there are a number of ballet sets that do need to take weight (think the stairs act 3 swan lake and Cinderella) - interesting these are newer sets so maybe that is feeding into higher costs for ballet with “better”/more structural sets than previously. 

[Lizbie1]

13 minutes ago, JNC said:

when I did a tour of the ROH once, the tour guide explained the higher pricing for opera due to the sets being far more expensive than ballet sets. They said that ballet sets are mainly ornamental props/screens that don’t need to take the weight of people standing on them (think a painted backdrop).

 

This makes a lot of sense. I'd also add that the rate of churn of opera productions is a lot higher.

[Emeralds]

5 hours ago, JNC said:

when I did a tour of the ROH once, the tour guide explained the higher pricing for opera due to the sets being far more expensive than ballet sets. They said that ballet sets are mainly ornamental props/screens that don’t need to take the weight of people standing on them (think a painted backdrop).

 

Of course this may not be the only reason, and I hope I’m not misremembering as the tour was a few years ago now (pre Covid). I’m aware that there are a number of ballet sets that do need to take weight (think the stairs act 3 swan lake and Cinderella) - interesting these are newer sets so maybe that is feeding into higher costs for ballet with “better”/more structural sets than previously. 

The tour guide isn't correct- as there are operas with no/minimal sets and lots of ballets with complicated hydraulics and stage sets (eg Nutcracker tree and stairs and Sleeping Beauty boat) and the operas still go up to £200 while the ballets don't (I'm not going to say "much lower" in case that gives ROH staff wild ideas).  It's nothing to do with the sets although it is true that the sets have to be sturdy and safe. 

 

It's to do with the artists who perform the shows. Ballet dancers can start work at 17- 19, opera singers have only started their training at that age, and in fact for some voice types even 18 is too young and their range and tone of voice don't appear till mid twenties or even later. It's not unusual to see operas where the age of some of the leads making role or company debuts are the same age that most ballet dancers are retiring or have retired. So, although the dancers eg at RB, ENB, BRB, ABT, NYCB etc etc are extraordinary and work incredibly hard, they start work at A level age while the opera singers start work at PhD or MBA age and that is reflected in the pay they  command. 

 

Having the right voice- the ones who can sing the leads at an opera house like ROH - is actually uncommon and down to luck and genetics, possibly even more than hard work, although opera singers do have to work as hard and be as single minded as dance students aiming to be ballet dancers. There are lots of music students/graduates who have scored top marks or distinction at every grade/level of singing exams but sadly have not much of a voice although they hit the notes at the right pitch and people wouldn't pay money to hear them in an opera. 

Edited May 3 by Emeralds

[BeauxArts]

Is this fact or conjecture? I am not sure the pricing differential can be explained so simplistically. You may be correct but what is your evidence base? 

[Mary]

There must be many factors I would have thought.

 

It would be interesting to see a breakdown of costs. For example, looking after the dancers must cost a fair bit in terms of gyms, physio and so on. Pointe shoes, we know, is a big bill. And so on.

 

 

 

[Emeralds]

1 hour ago, BeauxArts said:

Is this fact or conjecture? I am not sure the pricing differential can be explained so simplistically. You may be correct but what is your evidence base? 

Hi BeauxArts, if it's  the salary for singers rather than the sets you're referring  to, it's a fact- a senior long term staff member at ROH explained it once on a workshop for school students (they don't run these any more). Various opera singers and directors have also explained the pay and cost situation. 

 

Opera houses/companies don't have a company of dancers who progress through ranks eg corps de ballet, first artists, soloists, principals.  The soloists are hired per production. Some opera companies may hire the same singers over and over again if they and the singers are happy with the repertoire offered and what the singer can do but they are not part of the opera company; they are freelance artists being hired again.

 

Opera chorus members rarely progress to become lead singers unlike ballet company artists - it is extremely rare (though possible) to find one that has, again due to the biological and timing factor. If your voice only develops at 28 you do not have 6- 8 years to waste in a chorus (the technique for both is also different although a soloist could do both); you have to start working in  the supporting and lead roles before your voice changes/deepens/range alters, which again is common- Susanna, Fiordiligi and Pamina require a young voice; many Mozart sopranos have to transition to Strauss or Verdi roles after 10-12  years whereas a ballerina could dance Giselle and Aurora at 23 and continue dancing them till 35 or 38 (if she is still dancing at that age or beyond). 

 

Most coaches and conservatoires will advise promising potential stars to audition for small regional companies in the UK or abroad (Germany and USA have many) where they  can practise performing small and major solo roles away from the glare of international scrutiny. The vocal requirements of chorus singing are very different to the technique required of solo parts,  unlike in ballet, where a dancer could do corps swans one night and lead role in Requiem, Rhapsody or Danses Concertantes the following night. It is common to see chorus members in operas and concert repertoire (who have been singing for decades) in their 50s and 60s who never have sung a solo operatic part in that opera house or concert hall alongside lead sopranos, tenors, mezzos etc half their age who have never sung the chorus part of that opera, mass or symphony that they are the lead in, while it's rare to find an Aurora who has never been in the corps dryads or a Romeo who has never danced in one of the Capulet/Montague/villagers (there is the occasional star like Semionova or Guillem who hardly ever danced in the corps but they are exceptions,  even Natalia Osipova and Darcey Bussell have danced in the corps).

 

Nowadays all opera singers have to be prepared to travel internationally and domestically - an up to date passport and suitcases are as essential as vocal technique. Even those part of an opera house trainee programme like the Jette Parker scheme at ROH have to sing abroad or in other companies outside their house commitments to gain experience (and pay the bills). 

 

The twio art forms are just very different. There are of course some ballet companies abroad who do charge very high prices for ballet - almost as high as for their operas- because there is a huge demand so they can. They too are uncommon! 

Edited May 3 by Emeralds

[Lizbie1]

@Emeralds: what about your assertion that the price has "nothing to do with the sets"?

 

When opera sets aren't on the minimal side they can be very complicated indeed, with scenery that has to move around ths stage while being safe for dancers to stand on, sets designed to revolve and therefore be seen from all angles, etc. I can't think of anything in ballet to compare with the Keith Warner Ring sets, just off the top of my head. I imagine the only ballet sets that would be equivalent in turns of outlay (without even touching on the vast crew needed to operate it) are something like the Macfarlane Swan Lake designs, and those are expected to see hundreds of performances unlike the tens that a Ring cycle would optimistically have.

 

I don't imagine the hydraulics for the tree in Nutcracker or the boat in Sleeping Beauty - I had the idea that this was a milk float type affair rather than hydraulics, maybe I'm mistaken - come close in terms of technical complexity. Perhaps you know better?

[Dawnstar]

4 hours ago, Emeralds said:

Opera chorus members rarely progress to become lead singers unlike ballet company artists - it is extremely rare (though possible) to find one that has, again due to the biological and timing factor. If your voice only develops at 28 you do not have 6- 8 years to waste in a chorus (the technique for both is also different although a soloist could do both)

 

I'd say this depends on the chorus. Plenty of young singers have cut their teeth doing a season or two in the Glyndebourne chorus & lots of male British singers were at Oxbridge on choral scholarships before starting operatic careers. While full-time chorus work prior to a solo career is less common, Sarah Connolly is one singer who springs to mind who has done so successfully. A number of singers in the ROH chorus had solo careers before joining the chorus. Four of the current line-up, Tamsin Coombs, Nicholas Sharratt, Dawid Kimberg & Charbal Mattar, I personally have seen as soloists in the past. Also, while not the case at the ROH, smaller companies such as Opera North sometimes cast members of their chorus in lead roles, plus there are a couple of ON chorus members who I've seen in solo roles elsewhere too.

 

(Sorry, this is veering rather off-topic.)

[JNC]

Sorry to take further off topic but now I’m curious - why do opera sets/productions get refreshed more often than ballet ones?

 

Do the sets wear out quicker or is it more artistic expectations that there should be creative changes more often?

 

I’m curious because obviously it’s vastly expensive to change all sets/costumes, bring in a new director or some creative force (eg if you have slightly different positioning depending on sets as there’s no set “choreography” like in ballet?). 
 

I’m just wondering whether in the current economic times we are in they could make the opera productions last a bit longer? 
 

I suppose nothing lasts forever and with ballets using the same productions the sets/costumes will wear and need to be replaced but producing off an existing template is going to be cheaper, there’s no big artistic changes that have to be scoped and tested with the trial/error process removed. 
 

I’m now going even more off topic and wondering what big ballet production will be the next to have a refresh! The MacMillan/Georgiadis designs feel sacrosanct at this point so I’d imagine as much as I like the current Nutcracker production that might be next in line given it’s 40 years old now. To be honest I’d prefer to see Giselle given a refresh, I don’t like the jagged edge of the Willis’ costumes and I don’t know why but the plot doesn’t seem as strong to me as ENB Skeaping or Paris Opera’s version. Or I wonder if they redid the designs for a MacMillan work that hasn’t been seen recently (Rite of Spring for example) that could be an excuse to revive it. And whilst I adore the Makarova Bayadere, if an updated production that removes some of the “concerns” about it but retains the overall plot and choreography means it can have a full revival I’d prefer this to the work never been seen again at ROH! Anyway I don’t imagine we’ll have any production refreshes for many years given budget, I think we were lucky to have Cinderella. Although if they have the money for a full act McGregor…

[Scheherezade]

15 minutes ago, JNC said:

 

I’m just wondering whether in the current economic times we are in they could make the opera productions last a bit longer? 

Hopefully not the irredeemably bleak North Korea in nuclear war mode one having its first revival during the 24/25 season. Another production that I’ll be giving a miss. 

[alison]

I've always called it "profligacy", myself. See my comments in the season announcement thread for the Royal Opera.

[Geoff]

1 hour ago, Scheherezade said:

Hopefully not the irredeemably bleak North Korea in nuclear war mode one having its first revival during the 24/25 season. Another production that I’ll be giving a miss. 

It sort of feels like it’s going to be the second revival (we had it first in October 2022 and then a year ago in May) Often enough, in any case. 

[Scheherezade]

37 minutes ago, Geoff said:

It sort of feels like it’s going to be the second revival (we had it first in October 2022 and then a year ago in May) Often enough, in any case. 

It does. And it already feels like once too often. 

[Richard LH]

Clearly the name change means we can now divert ballet threads to demonstrate "inclusivity" by having a  discussion about opera instead 😂

Edited May 4 by Richard LH

[MAB]

6 hours ago, JNC said:

The MacMillan/Georgiadis designs feel sacrosanct at this point

 

Not so sacrosanct as I'd like.  All the alterations to sets. costumes and lighting plots have diminished the ballet over the years in my opinion.  I'd give a lot to see Romeo back in the original turquoise tunic.

[JNC]

2 minutes ago, MAB said:

 

Not so sacrosanct as I'd like.  All the alterations to sets. costumes and lighting plots have diminished the ballet over the years in my opinion.  I'd give a lot to see Romeo back in the original turquoise tunic.

Oh this is really interesting. I didn’t realise they had done little changes! Guess unless you spot the difference and you have a good eye/memory it’s not necessarily something that would be obvious. I wonder why they changed the colour of the tunic?

[alison]

I'd forgotten that. And the ladies' party dresses don't look as much like upholstery fabric as they used to.