Changes in RAD technique?

[Dancer Sugar Plum]

I first started going to RAD classes about 7 years ago. In that time I've done the Intermediate exam. But from doing various other RAD classes I've noticed a change in RAD style, which I don't quite understand. I have been to a few RAD schools, so this is my observation.

 

I have been to non-RAD classes where it is consider correct that the working hip should not raise to get a higher extension in second, whether it is in grand battement or a develope, etc. However, I have noticed that it seems to be the trend to get your leg up as high as possible, no matter what the cost. Even if the student needs to raise his or her hips to get a higher leg, this seems to be considered okay. One teacher said that I was 'lazy' (a direct quote from her) because I did not kick my legs up as high as they could go, even though I did not have the strength to keep my hips square if I just 'kick my legs up as high as they can go'.

 

I have also heard of the 'advice' to take the upper back, back, in order to make room for the leg to go higher up the front, for example, in a develope devant. I was going a glisse devant with a rise (at the barre), which needed a hold of 2 counts. The placement, which works for me, is to think of the body growing forwards and up over the working foot on the rise. But I was told by the RAD teacher that my placement was wrong, that I should take the weight back instead. If I was doing this en pointe, surely I would fall off? And if I take my weight back, surely I would lose the hold I have in my centre muscles? And then surely leaning back while raising a leg devant does not make a very pleasant line?

 

I just wondered if these are actual changes RAD have made in teaching technique, or have I just happened to come across a particular interpretation of RAD technique from a few RAD teachers? Or is it just by chance I have come across teachers, whose methods do not suit me, and nothing to do with RAD technique?

 

Obviously, I don't want to argue with teachers in class, and I never have. To cut a long post short, I guess I am looking for advice on what to do or say when teachers insist I do something, which does not work for me at all.

[Anjuli_Bai]

I am not a RAD teacher.  However the changes you are describing go against everything i was taught.

 

Since one does not argue with the teacher - if it doesn't work for you - you need to go.  i faced this several times in my years of taking class.

[LinMM]

I really hate the hip distortion when doing a developpe to second it just looks ugly but I think more girls are tempted (and maybe some teachers too) because there seems to be a current trend for legs at 180 in almost any position!!!

 

I suppose if you can get your leg to shoulder height devant and more importantly hold it there then a VERY slight lean back might be okay but if its being taught from grade level then that is not such a good idea because as you say you lose touch with your Core a bit and up to at least vocational grade level(intermediate foundation) I'm sure the core needs more emphasis not less.

 

The other thing Ive noticed is something odd going on with the foot placement in attitudes mainly where it is turned at an angle to appear more turned out I suppose but I think it spoils the line of the leg in good dancers.

[taxi4ballet]

The other thing Ive noticed is something odd going on with the foot placement in attitudes mainly where it is turned at an angle to appear more turned out I suppose but I think it spoils the line of the leg in good dancers.

DD tells me this is called winging (I think) and isn't taught by RAD but is used by the professionals... Anjuli???

[mimi66]

DD tells me this is called winging (I think) and isn't taught by RAD but is used by the professionals... Anjuli???

 

I have heard ex- professional dancers calling it "fishing".  They said it was a bit of a cheat to make it look as if the foot is turned out more, if I recall correctly.

 

(I wanted to quote LinMM's post as well, but don't know how to!  sorry you may have to scroll up a bit.)

Edited January 22, 2014 by mimi66

[Anjuli_Bai]

DD tells me this is called winging (I think) and isn't taught by RAD but is used by the professionals... Anjuli???

 

Out of curiosity I googled images of Alicia Alonso, Natalia Makarova, Karen Kain, Carla Fracci, Margot Fonteyn, Veronika Part, Gillian Murphy, Natalia Osipova, Maria Alexandrovna - and I don't see winging.  So, I don't think I'd call it a professional thing.

 

In choosing these ballerinas I tried to look at a varied time span as well as various schools/styles.

[Anjuli_Bai]

I also googled (images) :  ballet winging the foot - and you can see some examples.  The foot can also be "winged" to the front.

 

Sorry for the double post.

[mimi66]

 

 

[...]

 

Obviously, I don't want to argue with teachers in class, and I never have. To cut a long post short, I guess I am looking for advice on what to do or say when teachers insist I do something, which does not work for me at all.

 

I might use my "aunty" card and give her some lame excuse about hip/upper back being not mobile and don't want to over do it ...effectively getting permission not to follow her instruction on that particular move.

 

However, I agree with Anjuli that in long term it may be better not to attend these teachers' class... I know with grade exams it may be very complicated, but if, in a way, an important "trust" (that the teacher will not make you do something that hurt your body) is broken then it will affect one's learning... I think.

 

Just my view.

[Legseleven]

All of DD's teachers would (metaphorically) stamp on any lifting of the working hip or leaning back to increase the height of the lifted leg. She is at an RAD school and the teachers include an international RAD vocational examiner who is of course very up to date with RAD technique requirements, although two of the teachers are actually Cecchetti trained. Whatever their own method of training, they all teach RAD ballet - along with free work of course - and none of them would allow what you have described, Dancer Sugar Plum.

[2dancersmum]

Nor would any of the teachers at DDs school.    All RAD trained.  Hips, core, turn out etc all far more important than height of the leg.

[FullContretemps]

I have had at least 4 different teachers who were RAD trained (even if not all were teaching me RAD at the time) and none of them would have advocated the 'developments' you are talking about. All enter candidates for vocational exams, get good results and send students to vocational schools. Sounds a bit dodgy to me!

[drdance]

I have to wholeheartedly agree with the 3 posts above - if in doubt refer to the books 'fundamentals of classical ballet technique' and 'progressions of classical ballet technique' both published by the RAD and available from the RAD online shop. They are the technique 'bibles' for the RAD.

[hfbrew]

I am predominantly an RAD teacher and I too would not endorse the techniques described.

 

Its a only a matter of weeks since my last RAD course and its still very much a case of correct placement rather than height of leg! Quite right too. Please dont think all RAD teachers are like as descrbed in original post!

[JulieW]

I'm with the others here. I've not seen this advocated in class. Placement/hipline far more important.

 

As for "fishing" the foot as I know it - the girls at WL are taught to do it, I remember one of them telling me about it some years ago

[hfbrew]

I'm with the others here. I've not seen this advocated in class. Placement/hipline far more important.

As for "fishing" the foot as I know it - the girls at WL are taught to do it, I remember one of them telling me about it some years ago

True.And in some cases being taught to fish helps correct a sickle foot which looks far worse. Certainly helped ds who actually cant physically "fish" but engaging the muscles required stopped his foot sickling when in attitude or arabesque.

 

But going back to placement/hipline, all good teachers know that it should not be sacrificed for height of leg!

[balletqs]

As an RAD teacher I don't think there is a particular RAD style with regards to legs. It is more about safe dance technique, what is right for an individual child to achieve correct line, placement etc to acheive their best results when examined on the assessment criteria. The weight placement should be over the metatarsal at all times, without a doubt. However I do find some physiques respond to bringing the upper body and weight placement well in front of the leg when working a la 2nd, so the leg almost appears to be extending from the back whilst keeping the hips completely level, to achive a better line, so the leg can extend fully from the hip, these students often have poor turnout and short waists and tend to tuck under in 2nd, it avoids any twisting. Examiners will also look for a consistent height of leg front, side and back and correct line in a position and placement of the hips. A good teacher should be looking at the individual. As for style, I think the only change is that the RAD are embpracing and encouraging the development from a young age of a natural sense of quality and expressiveness and musicality. My recent vocational results reflected this, the technicians did not get the marks they hoped for whilst the performers achieved beyond what they would have done once. So aim to enjoy the movement quality and purity of line and placing. Yes its good to throw caution to the wind and wack the leg at all expense now and again but this is better done through daily stretching and strengthening. Laziness in my eyes is when a student doesn't work to their maximum potential in every class or commit fully to what they are doing, not the degree of the leg. I'd get out of there

[Dancer Sugar Plum]

Thanks to everyone who responded to my post.

 

About 'fishing' the foot, I was advised something similar to hfbrew's DS. I can't physically 'fish' and my 'default' position used to be a sickled foot. But in always trying to 'fish' the foot it helped me break the habit of sickling.

 

Going back to my original post, I'd had some doubts/worries about the school I have referred to in my original post. Like a lot of people attending one RAD school (or another syllabus school) I only get to see what that particular school is teaching, so I thought it would be useful to check if there has been a change. I was very pleased to hear from forum members, including RAD teachers and RAD teachers to-be, that what I have described in my first post has not suddenly become the new 'trend' of the RAD. I had a feeling it was just that particular school and forum members have confirmed it for me. The analogy of 'one bad apple' comes to my mind.

 

However, it is quite worrying that methods not endorsed by the RAD seem to be - at that school - taught as RAD technique. I have learnt from this thread, and from other teachers not connected to the school I have referred to, that RAD teachers need to attend courses to keep up-to-date, etc. So it confuses me how one school appears to have got it so wrong and 'slipped through the net'. I feel sorry for the other students who have no idea that what they are taught is not considered proper RAD technique (or even just proper ballet technique).

 

I had a few very upsetting classes at this school recently and I deliberately did not mention all the details in my first post just in case I happen to give the school away, therefore potentially revealing my identity to people connected to the school. But there were other technique 'methods', which are obviously not supported by the RAD, as shown by the replies on this thread.

 

I will be looking for another RAD school if I decide to continue doing RAD work.

 

Thanks once again everyone.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Dancer Sugar Plum

[Jazzpaws]

I first started going to RAD classes about 7 years ago. In that time I've done the Intermediate exam. But from doing various other RAD classes I've noticed a change in RAD style, which I don't quite understand. I have been to a few RAD schools, so this is my observation.

 

I have been to non-RAD classes where it is consider correct that the working hip should not raise to get a higher extension in second, whether it is in grand battement or a develope, etc. However, I have noticed that it seems to be the trend to get your leg up as high as possible, no matter what the cost. Even if the student needs to raise his or her hips to get a higher leg, this seems to be considered okay. One teacher said that I was 'lazy' (a direct quote from her) because I did not kick my legs up as high as they could go, even though I did not have the strength to keep my hips square if I just 'kick my legs up as high as they can go'.

 

I have also heard of the 'advice' to take the upper back, back, in order to make room for the leg to go higher up the front, for example, in a develope devant. I was going a glisse devant with a rise (at the barre), which needed a hold of 2 counts. The placement, which works for me, is to think of the body growing forwards and up over the working foot on the rise. But I was told by the RAD teacher that my placement was wrong, that I should take the weight back instead. If I was doing this en pointe, surely I would fall off? And if I take my weight back, surely I would lose the hold I have in my centre muscles? And then surely leaning back while raising a leg devant does not make a very pleasant line?

 

I just wondered if these are actual changes RAD have made in teaching technique, or have I just happened to come across a particular interpretation of RAD technique from a few RAD teachers? Or is it just by chance I have come across teachers, whose methods do not suit me, and nothing to do with RAD technique?

 

Obviously, I don't want to argue with teachers in class, and I never have. To cut a long post short, I guess I am looking for advice on what to do or say when teachers insist I do something, which does not work for me at all.

DD's RAD teacher always teaches the girls to keep their hips square - she would rather see this than a high leg. Also, is DD is corrected about weight placement, it's always to bring weight forward and not back. I'm sure all teachers are different, I know we are very lucky to have DD's teacher, she is wonderful

[charlie153]

Throughout the ballet world there are always slightly different schools of thought regarding basic technique, this is why ballet (as all art forms) is constantly evolving and I think as an adult dancer/professional it is your job and up to you to take on board new ways of thinking that different teachers/choreographers present to you and decide yourself wether to apply them or not, if it doesn't work for you then it doesn't necessarily mean it is point blank wrong.

In response to the original post, the best thing to do would be to ask your teacher about the corrections, maybe you have missunderstood her, sometimes when I am teaching, pupils can look lazy during grand battlement/adage etc, not because of the height of leg, just because of the way they are presenting the exercise, maybe your teacher thinks you have more strength than you think you do! It's hard to say without seeing you dance! But like I said your best bet is you ask her to explain what she meant and in sure she would be happy to help!

As for "fishing" I think it's one of the many little accepted "cheats" that us dancers have developed as unfortunately we arnt all blessed with the perfect ballet aesthetics and in the competitive industry we work in dancers have found subtle ways to disguise our "faults"

Hope this helped!

[aileen]

Dancer Sugar Plum, if you have had 'a few very upsetting classes' at your current school then I can understand why you might wish to change schools. However, I do feel that ballet teachers are a slightly different breed of teacher and speak to pupils in ways which would not be usual in an academic school. They can sometimes be rather brusque and quite personal. Your teacher's use of the word 'lazy' is a case in point. Academic school teachers tend not to use this type of pejorative adjective today, certainly directly to a child, (and particularly in relation to a younger child), but ballet teachers often seem to be from a different era. My dd has heard quite a few comments which she and I find quite amusing but which others could potentially be quite offended by. They are not meant unkindly but I think arise out of a determination to get the best out of a student and a shortage of time. I hope that I'm not offending any teachers on here who I'm sure are all delightful.

[Dancer Sugar Plum]

I understand there are different ways of working and approaching technique and I like to think I understand enough not to label them as 'wrong'. As an example, if a teacher or choreographer choreographs a piece that mixes contemporary with ballet, I wouldn't label it as 'wrong' because the feet might be pararell sometimes.

 

I am also not the type of person - I believe - to be offended by genuine corrections. In fact, I would rather be corrected rather than ignored in class.

 

I have a teacher who used to be a professional ballet dancer. I know that he can tell that I have more flexibility than I have the strength to sustain, so he has never told me - or any other student - than we are lazy for not getting the legs higher in grande battement, for example. But just by chance, in between exercises at the school I have been referring to, there were students who were getting their leg in a develope second to be as high as they could go by raising the working hip. I have noticed this 'trend' at the school for a while, and the 'trend' that these girls are not told their hips should be level. I hasten to add I go to class to learn, and it has only been by chance I've noticed this in-between exercises.

 

It's during the time in-between exercises that I've noticed there are girls sickling en pointe, both in echappe second facing barre and during courus. These girls are not corrected for sickling. Instead the teacher spent all her time yelling at me to me get my leg higher all through class even though it was distorting my hip line.

 

With the school I am referring to, I can't really ask for clarification on corrections either because the teacher(s) have made it quite clear what they are after. In my original post, I have used the example of a rise with glisse devant as an example. I thought of growing up and slightly forward in order to hold the rise. The teacher said this was wrong and pulled my weight back so that it was like doing a back-bend. As I mentioned earlier, her school tells her students to 'take your weight back to allow the leg to go up at the front'.

 

Also, since this is a public forum, I am having to hold back on a lot of the details. However, I would understand if this was a particular method of teaching, which just so happens does not suit me. But I am confused why it's being 'sold' as RAD.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Dancer Sugar Plum

[aileen]

Once you lose confidence in a teacher it is time to change teachers IMO.

[Ellie]

Dancer Sugar Plum,

 

I was a bit reluctant to comment for fear of offending anyone or to be seen as contradicting correct technique, but....

 

In my experience, pre professional students are 'allowed' to 'cheat' (a bit) in certain classes. Leaning slightly backward for example when extending the leg devant does improve the look of the extension for most people. Winging (fishing) the foot is also fairly commonplace, as is (when on stage in a static pose a terre en arriere) the extension is actually much more a la seconde than derriere - giving the impression of beautiful turnout- Regarding the rise in glisse devant - this sounds very much like Vaganova technique where the upper back is always engaged and used differently than in for example RAD. I hasten to add that these are 'techniques' (tricks ?) which in my experience are allowed to students who already have a very solid understanding of correct technique.....( I have no idea about the sickling, but maybe the teacher is correcting you more because they see potential ? It does happen) x

 

I apologise for the lack of accents for ballet terms in my post - my PC won't let me !

[LinMM]

One of the few advantages of getting to a more advanced age(post 60) is that no teacher any more has TOO much influence!!

So I don't have any problem these days (hasn't always been the case I hasten to add) in voicing any concerns I may have about technique advice.....though I always try to keep it light hearted! But sometimes you have to take what you feel you need from a class and leave off what you don't!! So if you don't want to displace your hip....don't!! Easier said than done I know.

But if there are other things you like about the teacher then just put up with the odd rant about some things (in your mind quietly agree to disagree if this cannot be expressed openly) and enjoy the things the teacher does well!

 

A little example. I do mostly BBO classes and Russian style classes. There are some things which are executed differently in these styles. EG: temps leve chasse pas de bourree in Russian style is done with more of a step than a true chasse and in my BBO class the teacher is always saying "chasse Linda chasse you're not in Russian class now!!" And then I make a big point of "well I can't do chasse any more" and she will say "oh yes you can in my class you can do chasse!" And then I do it of course.....Though I really prefer the Russian style with this step.......It's all very good natured and of course doesn't happen in every class. Sometimes she lets it go and sometimes not!! But she gives very good advice about many things as does my Russian teacher so I just try to absorb all the advice and then see what really works for me as an individual what I feel really in tune with and it's never going to be all one style.

 

As an older dancer I also try to protect my body in a reasonable way and would not do anything I thought might lead to any damage because occasionally teachers do forget your age! If you feel uncomfortable about the hip thing then just don't do it!! Though I think when you are younger it is harder to stay with your own council so to speak.

[Ellie]

Well said LinMM. x

[charlie153]

I agree Ellie, when teaching young students technique is a lot more clearer cut but as you grow into a professional you've had that many teachers with that many views and backgrounds of dance and you are also encouraged to develop your own style, little tricks and cheats pop in, and to be honest if a choreographer asks you to do something, no matter how weird or wonderful it is..you do it ...if you want to keep the job!

Teaching adult ballet/older students who arnt looking for a career in dance is harder because students are there for different reasons, but still want to be pushed and it's tough to gain a happy medium. If you are finding the classes unhelpful, the corrections/techniques taught confusing and you feel you can't ask for an explanation, maybe you arnt gelling with this teacher and it would be better to move on?

As for the bit about her being and RAD teacher, what are the schools exam results like? That should give you an idea of the schools teaching standard

[Dancer Sugar Plum]

When I wrote my original post, I partly used it as a chance to have a rant about classes, which had not gone well. But I was also confused about what seemed to be RAD 'changes'. I had been wondering for a while whether these 'techniques' were always there, but for some reason I had not noticed. Or if these 'techniques' were new. But it seems from forum members who do RAD classes, or are RAD teachers, RAD teachers to-be or parents of DC that what I have described in my original post is not thought of as 'usual' RAD technique.
 

 

Dancer Sugar Plum,

 

I was a bit reluctant to comment for fear of offending anyone or to be seen as contradicting correct technique, but....

 

In my experience, pre professional students are 'allowed' to 'cheat' (a bit) in certain classes. Leaning slightly backward for example when extending the leg devant does improve the look of the extension for most people. Winging (fishing) the foot is also fairly commonplace, as is (when on stage in a static pose a terre en arriere) the extension is actually much more a la seconde than derriere - giving the impression of beautiful turnout- Regarding the rise in glisse devant - this sounds very much like Vaganova technique where the upper back is always engaged and used differently than in for example RAD. I hasten to add that these are 'techniques' (tricks ?) which in my experience are allowed to students who already have a very solid understanding of correct technique.....( I have no idea about the sickling, but maybe the teacher is correcting you more because they see potential ? It does happen) x

 

I apologise for the lack of accents for ballet terms in my post - my PC won't let me !

 

Ellie - I am glad you mentioned this and hope my original post doesn't read in a way that would make people worried they would offend by offering a different opinion or viewpoint. In fact, it's been really useful reading other people's viewpoints. It was interesting to read that things such as the upper back bend during a rise in glisse devant is more Vaganova technique.

 

I also don't have any complaints against pre-professionals (I believe you mean those in vocational school, who will soon be auditioning for jobs) who develop 'tricks' to look more turned out, or have a better line. I mentioned in an another thread that I have a teacher (not connected to the school I have referred to) who once talked about a 'trick' to look more turned out on stage. I hasten to add she wasn't talking about twisting knees or forcing turnout. She mentioned it to point out that having stage experience from when you're a young student enables you to get used to performing on stage and learn how to present yourself as well as possible. I find this fascinating and I don't have any complaints about these 'tricks'.

 

 

I agree Ellie, when teaching young students technique is a lot more clearer cut but as you grow into a professional you've had that many teachers with that many views and backgrounds of dance and you are also encouraged to develop your own style, little tricks and cheats pop in, and to be honest if a choreographer asks you to do something, no matter how weird or wonderful it is..you do it ...if you want to keep the job!
Teaching adult ballet/older students who arnt looking for a career in dance is harder because students are there for different reasons, but still want to be pushed and it's tough to gain a happy medium. If you are finding the classes unhelpful, the corrections/techniques taught confusing and you feel you can't ask for an explanation, maybe you arnt gelling with this teacher and it would be better to move on?
As for the bit about her being and RAD teacher, what are the schools exam results like? That should give you an idea of the schools teaching standard

 

Charlie153 - I agree with what you have said as well, and I have no questions against someone choreographing a piece, be they working for professionals or working on a piece for a school show, display, festival, competition, etc, which may involve mixing different genres of dance, or changing some 'rules'. I also understand that professionals would need to follow what a choreographer wants to be done since it's part of their job, to put it bluntly.

 

Some forum members have mentioned that once you lose confidence/trust in a teacher it is time to move on and I agree with this. But I hope my posts haven't read like I believe, or claim, that all RAD teachers are 'like that'. I have some, or only met with, wonderful teachers and some of them are connected with the RAD and some are not.

 

I once met a visiting RAD teacher from the other side of the world, who was on a flying visit and dropped into one of my open classes. We were able to chat after class. She had a student who was competing in the Genee that year and it wasn't the first year she had had students compete in the Genee competition. It was fascinating to hear about the challenges faced by her students, and probably other students as well, who go through this competition. The teacher talked about tavelling alone with her student to the country and city of the competition, and the challenges she faced in trying to coach her student's variations in a place neither of them had ever been to before. It was a real eye-opener to me to hear what it is like to be a part of this competition and I was touched by the dedication this teacher had in ensuring her student could perfom the best she could during the competition.

 

I understand that different teachers suit different people, and that not everyone is looking for the same things in a teacher (balletically-speaking). I understand that what I may like about one teacher, someone else may not for one reason or another. So I hope my posts on this thread haven't made people think I believe everyone is after the same type of teacher as well.

[Aurora]

I agree with what's been said but just wanted to query one thing.

 

On the correction where you've been told to take the upper body back - is this like the efface position where there is an upward lift back and an opening of the chest? If so I can see how that might work. It's possible to stand in efface without the weight going back into the heels and indeed to do a backbend.

 

I'm not saying its correct or 'RAD' and it's not how I do it, I'm just saying it may not be considered wrong.

[Ellie]

When I wrote my original post, I partly used it as a chance to have a rant about classes, which had not gone well. But I was also confused about what seemed to be RAD 'changes'. I had been wondering for a while whether these 'techniques' were always there, but for some reason I had not noticed. Or if these 'techniques' were new. But it seems from forum members who do RAD classes, or are RAD teachers, RAD teachers to-be or parents of DC that what I have described in my original post is not thought of as 'usual' RAD technique.

 

 

 

Ellie - I am glad you mentioned this and hope my original post doesn't read in a way that would make people worried they would offend by offering a different opinion or viewpoint. In fact, it's been really useful reading other people's viewpoints. It was interesting to read that things such as the upper back bend during a rise in glisse devant is more Vaganova technique.

 

I also don't have any complaints against pre-professionals (I believe you mean those in vocational school, who will soon be auditioning for jobs) who develop 'tricks' to look more turned out, or have a better line. I mentioned in an another thread that I have a teacher (not connected to the school I have referred to) who once talked about a 'trick' to look more turned out on stage. I hasten to add she wasn't talking about twisting knees or forcing turnout. She mentioned it to point out that having stage experience from when you're a young student enables you to get used to performing on stage and learn how to present yourself as well as possible. I find this fascinating and I don't have any complaints about these 'tricks'.

 

 

 

Charlie153 - I agree with what you have said as well, and I have no questions against someone choreographing a piece, be they working for professionals or working on a piece for a school show, display, festival, competition, etc, which may involve mixing different genres of dance, or changing some 'rules'. I also understand that professionals would need to follow what a choreographer wants to be done since it's part of their job, to put it bluntly.

 

Some forum members have mentioned that once you lose confidence/trust in a teacher it is time to move on and I agree with this. But I hope my posts haven't read like I believe, or claim, that all RAD teachers are 'like that'. I have some, or only met with, wonderful teachers and some of them are connected with the RAD and some are not.

 

I once met a visiting RAD teacher from the other side of the world, who was on a flying visit and dropped into one of my open classes. We were able to chat after class. She had a student who was competing in the Genee that year and it wasn't the first year she had had students compete in the Genee competition. It was fascinating to hear about the challenges faced by her students, and probably other students as well, who go through this competition. The teacher talked about tavelling alone with her student to the country and city of the competition, and the challenges she faced in trying to coach her student's variations in a place neither of them had ever been to before. It was a real eye-opener to me to hear what it is like to be a part of this competition and I was touched by the dedication this teacher had in ensuring her student could perfom the best she could during the competition.

 

I understand that different teachers suit different people, and that not everyone is looking for the same things in a teacher (balletically-speaking). I understand that what I may like about one teacher, someone else may not for one reason or another. So I hope my posts on this thread haven't made people think I believe everyone is after the same type of teacher as well.

Your original post read perfectly ! I just like to tread carefully so to speak as I'm aware that there are a multitude of viewpoints when it comes to technique. Also, having read through your thread again specifically regarding the 'correct' RAD technique, I doubt that any of these little tips and tricks we've mentioned would be deemed acceptable in an exam setting...x

[Dancer Sugar Plum]

I agree with what's been said but just wanted to query one thing.

 

On the correction where you've been told to take the upper body back - is this like the efface position where there is an upward lift back and an opening of the chest? If so I can see how that might work. It's possible to stand in efface without the weight going back into the heels and indeed to do a backbend.

 

I'm not saying its correct or 'RAD' and it's not how I do it, I'm just saying it may not be considered wrong.

 

Aurora - There is are a couple of exercises in the centre, which ask for the efface line. As you have mentioned there is an upward lift of the back and an opening of the chest. I have also heard it being described as an opening up and out of one shoulder from the back.

 

However I was referring to 'plain' developes devant, and the rise on glisse devant. The school I have referred to have asked for 'leaning back' as you do these movements. It has been pointed out that this sounds like Vaganova technique, which is a fair point - I have learnt something new. However, the school I have talked about is an RAD school, and have no connection to Vaganova, which was why I have wondered if this was a new 'trend' for the RAD...

[Aurora]

Oh I understand that Dancer Sugar Plum - my reply was just meant to say that whilst it may not be RAD it may also not be considered incorrect where others have implied it is. There are so many variations in technique!

[ballet teacher]

not a new trend from the RAD,sounds like you need a new teacher.

I support the musicality and performance of the new RAD syllabus. Do try the new Advanced Foundation/Adv 1.they are wonderful.

I am discovering them with my RAD students they are finding them challenging but amazing too

Ballet teacher RAD.

[Legseleven]

DD also absolutely loves the new Advanced Foundation and Advanced 1 work, ballet teacher, especially the Adv Foundation ports de bras! They are a lot more challenging than the previous syllabi (from what I can see, having danced to old intermediate level many moons ago! - and in DD's and her teachers' opinions) but so much more enjoyable - and the music is fabulous.