Royal Ballet - which way now?

[aileen]

BobK has kindly provided us with some statistics. They seem quite impressive to me. What do other people think?

[Fonty]

Lindsay, if you read my post again, you will see that I did not say the concept should be applied to ballet alone. What I am saying is that other art forms are allowed to produce works that do not fit that description, and nobody thinks these are inferior in any way. 

 

Yet I get the feeling that if a choreographer was to produce a new, original, 3 act ballet, with a story line, to classical music, with the dancers dressed in tutus, the critics would dismiss it because it did not fit their view that new ballet should be "daring".

Edited October 14, 2013 by Fonteyn22

[Lindsay]

Aileen, I take your point that subtle technical issues are more obvious to the expert eye and will not necessarily be seen by the occasional ballet-goer.  However, I do think there is an "aura" about a great dancer who is fully on top of their technique and able to project to their audience.  The occasional ballet-goer may not understand why that dancer is "different" or "special" but they can feel it.  Nunez has "it".  Osipova in her own way has it.  Acosta has it in spades.  Of the other principals at Royal, McRae and Zanowsky for me come closest.  Such dancers are rare indeed and I think ENB currently has three, in Rojo, Cojocaru and Muntagirov. 

 

Below that level there is the competent principal and soloist, who can make the audience feel secure in their technical performance but without any particular projection or brilliance.  There are several principals at the RB who fall into this category. 

 

Unfortunately the RB also sends out soloists (of various ranks) who are less secure and it can be anxiety-inducing to watch them.  Although an inexpert audience may not appreciate when they are seeing excellent technique, they will notice obvious mishaps.  It is all very well to say (as some do - I'm not pointing at you in particular) that the Royal's style is all about characterisation and that they do not try to emulate the show-off technical fireworks of the Russian companies, but a sloppy technique (as opposed to the occasional slip when a dancer is really going for it) can undermine a lot of good acting.  At the level of top international companies a certain level of technique should be taken as a given.  And yes, of the companies I have seen in the past couple of years, I think there was more technical depth at POB or ABT or NYCB or the Bolshoi or Vienna or ABT.

 

And Fonteyn22: That's just not true.  The critics took Acosta's Don Q very seriously, although they didn't all like it.  I don't think Clement Crisp's review was based on its lack of edginess!!

[MAB]

I’m finding this argument becoming unnecessarily subjective, personal favourites – okay, but I get uneasy when large numbers of dancers' abilities are simply dismissed because the poster doesn’t personally care for them.

[Lindsay]

MAB, I was deliberately trying to avoid personal attacks, by naming only those dancers about whom I had something positive to say.  I have criticised nobody by name (save for one qualified comment on McRae in an earlier post). It is difficult to explain what I was talking about without some examples.  And surely it is acceptable to name companies.

[Nina G.]

 

I quote Lindsay post 208:  "And yes, of the companies I have seen in the past couple of years, I think there was more technical depth at POB or ABT or NYCB or the Bolshoi or Vienna or ABT".

 

This could yet again be another topic  

 

Lindsay, could it be because most of the Companies you have listed above take in a majority (if not nearly all) of their dancers from their affiliated Schools?

I agree with you about some dancers showing a sloppy technic.... ( IMO surely not the dancers who have trained at the RB affiliated school, the RBS!)

[Anna C]

MAB, I was deliberately trying to avoid personal attacks, by naming only those dancers about whom I had something positive to say.  I have criticised nobody by name (save for one qualified comment on McRae in an earlier post). It is difficult to explain what I was talking about without some examples.  And surely it is acceptable to name companies.

I understand what you're saying, Lindsay, and in my opinion of course it's fine to name companies. However, it did seem somewhat dismissive of other dancers. We all have our favourites, but that is not to say that the other principals and soloists don't have star quality or a special "aura". They do for other people! :-)

[alison]

(Sorry, I can't edit on my current device so I'm re-posting - mods please tidy up if possible!)

 

Have duely "tidied up" your post of 2:05 pm

[alison]

Edit: and have apparently duplicated my *own* post as a result   :blush:

[Lindsay]

Of course everyone has their particular favourites Spanner, but at the same time it cannot be wrong to apply some objective standards to dancers.  To give an extreme example, most people would I think agree that Carlos Acosta is a better dancer than John Sergeant.   To return to the original topic, I am not alone in thinking that Cojocaru has a special quality which renders her quite out of the ordinary as a dancer.  If that were not the case, then ballet companies all over the world would not be rushing to secure her services and critics would not be in such general agreement about her performances.  There are objective reasons I could point to for this beyond personal preferences: her exceptional balance, musicality and the plasticity and "flow" of her movement would just be a few.  I'm sure others could find more.

 

The point I am making is that not all dancers are equal (however nice it would be to imagine such a thing).  There is of course much room for dispute/lively debate about particular qualities, suitability for roles and personal preferences.  However, there are some talents, like that of Cojocaru, which are so self-evident that for a company director to have them at their disposal and not use them represents a significant failure of judgment...

[Jan McNulty]

This thread: 

 

http://www.balletcoforum.com/index.php?/topic/4019-alina-cojocaru-and-johan-kobborg-to-leave-the-royal-ballet/page-8#entry63370

 

has gone somewhat off topic but has generated a really super discussion.  All the more general later posts have now been moved into this new thread.

 

Thanks go to Lindsay for starting this lively discussion.  Please join in!

[balletla]

The reason I raise the issue is that the ROH receive such a disproportionate amount of the arts council funding which goes to dance while contemporary companies struggle on a shoestring or in many cases are going out of business altogether.  It seems to me that with guaranteed funding comes a duty to contribute to the life of the art form.  If that duty is not fulfilled then the funding should be given to people who will take it seriously.  

 

The thing is, there are a LOT of contemporary companies now and there is already plenty of choice of contemporary (and it is the only thing that gets funded in schools and the community), so why the need to convert RB into a more contemporary company? By remaining predominantly classical,  RB is filling a niche in the market.

 

In terms of contributing to the life of the art form, RB provides an entry point for the art form through classical ballet, by attracting the young and the new - how many little girls dream of going to see fairies in tutus at the Royal Ballet? How many of them dream of going to see Chroma?

[Lindsay]

Ask any professional contemporary dancers whether it is easy to find salaried work and I promise you will receive a hollow laugh. Although it may appear different at student level, I can assure you that the vast majority of funding (and permanent jobs) go to the four ballet companies. If you doubt it I can dig out the breakdown from the last Arts Council funding round.

 

And Disney provides an entry point for little girls to cinema, but there is still room for Scorsese, Coppola, woody Allen, the Coen brothers, Tarantino and David Lynch in the industry. I'd like to think that ballet can be for grown-ups too.

[JennyTaylor]

Fascinating thread. I am an ordinary ballet fan,who in later life is now able to indulge my love for the ballet and buy tickets for the ballets I wish to see, wherever that may be. My personal choice happens to be the RB as I love going to the ROH but I will pick performances very carefully both for cast and specific ballets. I've seen most of the new works, but apart from Alice have never been tempted to repeat the experience. That's my personal preference and I'm sure some would call me a philistine. I don't care, because for me, I just like classical ballet.

 

I've been to see Sylvie Guillem in her post RB days at Sadlers' Wells and appreciate what she does, but it never wows me like her Manon did. I've also been to the ENB and one off performances such as Carlos Acosta specials (thank goodness I went to see Spartacus). I'd like to try to see more ENB now and would also say that Thomas Edur and Agnes Oakes were totally sublime. . 

 

All that being said, I have a home and a husband to go to, so there are limits!

 

I think MM did a good job with the RB. It's a very difficult balance - and she tried to encourage new works, They haven't been to my taste, apart from Alice,but they have been approved of by others. Basically, "modern" dance does nothing for me. I like a story and I like emotion - oh, and I hated Raven Girl, although I could admire the performances of Sarah Lamb and Melissa Hamilton. Once seen is quite sufficient, thank you. Bring on anything related to Mayerling, Manon, Giselle, La Fille, Onegin. DonQ, Romeo and Juliet etc. I'm bored with the Nutcracker, most RB Swan Lakes and SBeauties, but realise they are box office. I would like to see some Petit, Nureyev, other classical interpretations though.    

 

As for the clique around ballet dancers. I joined the Ballet Association as few years ago which gave me unprecedented and in my view unbelievable access to RB dancers, both through the monthly interviews and the annual dinner.  Yes, you need to live near London to make the most of this but it is v cheap to join and membership is completely open to all.

 

Some people go to every performance at the ROH, so there is inevitably an inner circle of people who all know each other and also hang out by the stage door. They are easy to spot at the ROH during the intervals. I often go on my own so tried to become friendly. but struggled. Yes, they do know the dancers by name and the dancers know them and are grateful for genuine fans. That being said, at the BA dinner I have sat next to Nehemiah Kish, Philip Moseley, Roberta Marquez (twice), Yuhui Choe and Laura Morera.  All were totally delightful. I've seen many interviews including Marianela Nunez, Thiago Soares, Tamara Rojo, Brian Maloney, Jonathan Cope (twice), Monica Mason, Darcey Bussell, Rupert Pennefather, Steven McRae (twice) and many others. Again, all came across as delightful, self effacing and very interesting people and were all very happy to pose for photos and chat afterwards.  One would never of course, share those conversations on line.

 

So, yes you can feel an outsider and I do quite often. But you can join in via the Ballet Association and gain some incredible access. 

 

I think it is also easy to feel an outsider in this forum too. I read some postings and know I can never compete with the in depth knowledge of some of the people who post here. I wish I could, but I can't, so I don't try.  I say what I feel and hope others respect that, which I think they all do. 

 

Another way to connect is via Twitter. Bennet Gartside, Olivia Cowley, Gary Avis and others tweet, and during performances. There is nothing like tweeting a comment during a performance and getting an answer back from them during the interval. That is connection!   

 

A bit of a ramble, but hopefully, I have addressed some points on the thread. 

[Ian Macmillan]

From tomorrow's Links, and as a fair comparator, a pebble in the pond from the West Coast:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/15/arts/dance/san-francisco-ballet-champions-new-work.html?_r=0

 

Over to you, folks!

[Lindsay]

Thanks Ian. A nice article that goes some way towards dispelling the myth that new work never sells. Whenever I've seen SFB in London, at Sadler's Wells (or I seem to recall at the Opera House one summer soon after it reopened) the theatre has been full or nearly full and enthusiastic.

Jenny, as I've said before you are free to like what you like and your tastes are certainly well provided for at the ROH. And if people enjoy interacting with the dancers that is lovely for them and can be a very intelligent promotional tool for modern companies. But to me it is more interesting (and respectful of artists) to view the work produced from a evaluative and critical perspective rather than simply as fans. Otherwise you might as well follow One Direction.

Without new works, ballet will become frozen in time- a dead art form performing only old ideas. It would be as if everyone had stopped writing plays after Shakespeare. Which is not to say that Shakespeare isn't great and that it's exciting for people to see it, but it's important for the audience and crucial for the dancers, that the art form has an ongoing vitality. I also think new work should try and be something which is specific to ballet/dance. My problem with Alice was that it was the kind of glossy, expensive show which is done so much more professionally and with more wit in the West End.

Edited October 15, 2013 by Lindsay

[aileen]

Which new works have you liked, Lindsay? What do you think about BobK's statistics?

[zxDaveM]

you make some valid and interesting points Lindsay - but that One Direction put down, is just too contemptful

[Lindsay]

I have enjoyed some of the McGregor at the Opera House, particularly Infra and Chroma.  Sometimes Wheeldon when he is not doing narrative, especially Polyphonia because I love Ligeti's music (although I think that was made for NYCB and only later performed by the Royal).    But besides that I don't think the RB has commissioned anything to touch the recent work of Akram Khan or Russell Maliphant.  And although it's not so new any more, I am always very happy to see early Forsythe done anywhere - it's been a while now since the RB have touched this which I think is a shame.  I often find Mark Morris' work interesting and, as I said before, am very happy that Tamara is programming Kylian, Bejart et al at ENB. 

 

I think it would be interesting to breakdown the stats of new commissions during the Mason era and see how they were distributed amongst choreographers.  I think we might find they are dominated by McGregor and Wheeldon, with a smattering of "safe" home choreographers like Tuckett, Marriott and Scarlett.  I am struggling to think of many outsiders who were given a try - except for Mrozewski who made Castle Nowhere.  I would also be interested to know whether the "Draft Works" produced by company dancers are included in those statistics - I presume not.  I also think they could have used Cathy Marston more - I recall her doing some interesting stuff in the Linbury in the early 2000s, but maybe she was too busy at Bern.

[bangorballetboy]

*cough* Brandstrup *cough*

[Lindsay]

Sorry Dave - couldn't resist that one.  I am trying very hard to be polite.

[Lindsay]

Yes, fair point BBB.  Although, I am still recovering from my disappointment over his involvement in the mess that was the Titian/Metamorphosis programme.

[bangorballetboy]

Not mutually exclusive concepts...

 

And if people enjoy interacting with the dancers that is lovely for them and can be a very intelligent promotional tool for modern companies. But to me it is more interesting (and respectful of artists) to view the work produced from a evaluative and critical perspective rather than simply as fans.

[Lindsay]

I didn't say they were, but I have yet to see a comment on twitter made to or about any of the dancers who tweet which is less than adulatory or chummily excited.  And most of the ballet blogs have nothing but praise and interviews about what they eat for breakfast and how they prepare their pointe shoes.

 

I should add that I appreciate it is difficult to maintain critical distance when you know, or feel you know, personally the people involved.  I am married to a professional performer and understand that it takes a conscious effort to stand back and evaluate his work and that of his friends in the same way as I would a third party.  But it can be done.

Edited October 15, 2013 by Lindsay

[Fonty]

Fascinating thread. I am an ordinary ballet fan,who in later life is now able to indulge my love for the ballet and buy tickets for the ballets I wish to see, wherever that may be. My personal choice happens to be the RB as I love going to the ROH but I will pick performances very carefully both for cast and specific ballets. I've seen most of the new works, but apart from Alice have never been tempted to repeat the experience. That's my personal preference and I'm sure some would call me a philistine. I don't care, because for me, I just like classical ballet.

 

 

Yes, I agree with you, Jenny.  I have also seen practically every new work, (apart from Alice) and am struggling to remember any of them, let alone ones I would wish to see for a second time.

 

Of course ballet has to have new work or it becomes frozen, I understand that.  The trouble is, that the new ballets I have seen seem to be modern in style, rather than classical.

[LinMM]

I quite like adults pretending to be fairies....it can lead to some exquisite dancing with all the pure beauty of the classical form (Sleeping Beauty The Dream etc) and to some very satisfying and wonderful music.

Yes Ballet should evolve but some things are timeless.

Sometimes Ballet can get the whole meaning of a story across much more quickly and directly than a play as R and J and Month in the Country immediately come to mind as just two such ballets (love the plays too though) so that has some relevance

 

There is a lot of darker material around too eg Las Hermanas .....and I like this too...some shorter modern works can give you a real kick in the stomach.

I think it is also true that the Royal Ballet should try to attract the best modern choreographers too

Diana Vishneva....that lovely dancer....has been doing some very interesting works at ABT which I would love to see here at the Royal.

 

The subsidy issue is a tricky one. Last July I was at a reunion dinner up near Bradford. I was the only "southerner" there the others from North or Midlands. When I said I would be going to see the ballet at the ROH soon this was met with some dismay(even derision) on some people's part. They see it all as an elitist thing and only people in the South East/London area should pay towards this subsidy in their view....as they are the most likely people to use it and so on(I wish I hadn't been quite so dumbstruck at the time).( Of course on this Forum one knows people travel from all over UK to see the Royal Ballet and Opera).

 

Well of course I can hardly agree with this somewhat parochial view of the Arts but those views are out there so if the Royal is to carry on receiving the level of subsidy it does it has got to be seen to be the very best not just in UK but the World.

All the fine Arts....Ballet, singing, painting etc need a certain higher level of subsidy. It takes much longer for individuals to reach the higher levels of execution and of course artistry required in these fields.

I think some of the better Contemporary companies should get more subsidy but they have to prove their worth too.....there are some I never want to see frankly. Some dance may be more satisfying for the actual performers to do than for the audience watching!

 

The Royal does need to work with the best of the modern too as said but don't let's throw the baby out with the bath water either some classical ballets will continue to be enjoyed long after my time that's for sure!

There's room for Beethoven and Philip Glass!!

[Aruna S]

 ( Of course on this Forum one knows people travel from all over UK to see the Royal Ballet and Opera).

 

 

 

And from outside the UK too!

Edited October 15, 2013 by afds

[Jan McNulty]

Jenny, as I've said before you are free to like what you like and your tastes are certainly well provided for at the ROH. And if people enjoy interacting with the dancers that is lovely for them and can be a very intelligent promotional tool for modern companies. But to me it is more interesting (and respectful of artists) to view the work produced from a evaluative and critical perspective rather than simply as fans. Otherwise you might as well follow One Direction.

 

I started my theatre-going phase at the Liverpool Playhouse which, at the time, was still a full repertory theatre where the AD of the time (and subsequent ADs) had a stable of actors.  One of the nice things about this was that you saw actors doing different roles and could admire their versatility.  Of course I became a fan of them because I liked what they did.  I didn't know them, I don't (except in exceptional circumstances) go to stage doors and I never spoke to any of them but I was a fan.

 

When I first started watching ballet, I saw the same dancers doing different roles and became a fan of those to whom I was drawn (not necessarily principals but those who caught my eye over and over).  I think it is inevitable that if you go regularly you are going to become a fan of certain dancers and not so much of others.  You don't have to know them to be a fan and to look out for them.

 

OK, at Friends' events I have met dancers and gradually have got to know some of them enough to say hello to them in the street and to exchange tweets.

 

I don't know anything technical about ballet or dance but I watch something and I like it, or I don't.

 

Chunkydog is calling for her walkies but I will add more ramble later!

[Fonty]

After much brain racking, I have come up with two new(ish) ballets that I would like to see again.

 

The first one I have mentioned before, and was the 2nd act of Mr Wordly Wise by Twyla Tharp.  An absolutely beautiful piece of work, IMO, which has never been repeated as far as I can remember? 

 

The second one is a bit more vague.  It was a piece choreographed for the ENB, and the dancers wore constumes that resembled black leather tutus! I just cannot remember who the choreographer was, but I don't think ENB have done it again, which is a pity.  They must still have the costumes, and I don't remember any elaborate scenery.  I would not mind the RB having that one. 

 

So you see, I can and do appreciate new works.  Just not very many of them.  It seems to me that new choreographers tend to favour the Balanchine style, with oodles of long leg extensions, ensemble dancing and no plot, rather than the MacMillan narrative ballet with its mime, and dramatic pas de deux dances woven into the story. 

 

I am editing this to add that I realise the previous paragraph is a bit of a sweeping statement.  I am sure you can all think of many new works that don't really fit into either category.  Ashley Page springs to mind.  Not sure how I would describe his stuff. 

Edited October 15, 2013 by Fonteyn22

[zxDaveM]

 

Although, I am still recovering from my disappointment over his involvement in the mess that was the Titian/Metamorphosis programme.

 

I liked a good proportion of that - especially the middle section (Trespass). Some of the choreographers you mention I have found a bit boring, with 1 or 2 exceptional pieces, as I really don't get the writhing around on the floor in the dark concept, which seems a modern trend. Do wish we could see more Kylian though.

Totally agree more could be done with, and after, Draft Works. That often seems to be a breath of fresh air - that then gets wasted.

[Lindsay]

Janet, don't put yourself down - you clearly know LOTS about ballet and dance! All that is required is eyes, ears and an open mind.  And ideally a willingness to think a bit about what you see and articulate why it makes you feel the way it does.  It's clear from your comments over the years that you have all of those things! 

 

People do not need to be "experts" to have an opinion - the only barrier to a proper debate in forums like this is when people become narrow minded or defensive and don't accept that there can be a range of responses to the same work.  I am perfectly willing to accept that many posters like works that I do not and vice versa.  The only thing which I find irritating is kneejerk reactions to defend the status quo and an unwillingness to contemplate trying new things.  Nobody should feel threatened or put down by rational debate.

[zxDaveM]

 

So you see, I can and do appreciate new works.  Just not very many of them.  It seems to me that new choreographers tend to favour the Balanchine style, with oodles of long leg extensions, ensemble dancing and no plot, rather than the MacMillan narrative ballet with its mime, and dramatic pas de deux dances woven into the story.

I wish more modern choreographers would emulate Balanchine, and get some proper DANCING on the stage :-)

[chrischris]

Lindsay, I ask this quite genuinely: do you think that the standards (technically, artistically and dramatically) of the current RB dancers are lower than those at other large companies and lower than than those of past dancers at the RB? I think that there are very few real ballet 'stars' in the sense of being widely known outside their own companies and even fewer that are known to the general public. Apart from regular ballet-goers, most visitors to the ROH know nothing about the dancers and, not unreasonably, tend to make judgments based on the dancers' position in the company (ie they expect principals to be 'better' than soloists) and on whether they seem to be struggling with the technical demands of the role eg wobble, fall over, fall out of pointe etc. I think that the general public believes that ballet is very hard and is disposed to be impressed with anything that looks technically challenging. I also think that occasional ballet-goers judge a ballet overall - set, costumes, music, dancing - more than individual dancers, but maybe I'm wrong about this.

 

Completely agree with this, and this is the point I was making about 'stars' earlier.