The Royal Ballet: Four Temperaments mixed bill, March/April 2015

[alison]

Quite, Lindsay.  And I think somewhere - as I suggested - there is a point where, regardless of how good the training is, that type of work will be better on contemporary dancers rather than classically-trained ones.

[Sim]

I don't think they do too badly with the physical distortions required in Chroma, for example...

[ToThePointe]

Perhaps this is why he found the workshop approach so useful, as he would be able to see who could interpret his choreography in the best way. 

[penelopesimpson]

To me, it seems a shame that we must limit a company such as the Royal Ballet to such absolute terms. Yes they are a ballet company, but why must that limit them to just perform the classics. We are so fortunate to live in a city with one of the greatest ballet companies in the world, but they are also exceptional dancers who are capable of different styles of dance and I think it is such a treat to get to see a rare example of this. Choreographers such as McGregor or Shechter are perhaps too contemporary for some, but I strongly believe that it's important to welcome such creative people into this company to keep the art form moving forward and current. I also fully support any work that's bringing in a younger audience into the Opera House as I think it's time that a younger generation realise that ballet isn't elitist and can cater for all. 

 

Many have been saying that it's a shame that Shechter hasn't used the dancer's abilities because the choreography isn't particularly interesting. When I read Beatriz Stix-Brunell's blog piece about what it's like to work with Shechter I think she proves that this isn't the case. As she says, it has taken months for their bodies to adapt to his choreography as he demands for the upper body to be much more curved and relaxed- something which would be very difficult for a classically trained dancer. I think that even if it doesn't look like he's used the company, the fact that he's been able to manipulate their bodies to fit his style is a pretty great feat. 

 

I also think it's unfair to brand Kevin O'Hare's decision as a bit of a sham just so that he can be called 'innovative'. I think he's right to be commissioning new work by interesting choreographers and staging them alongside classics as he's proving that this is a company who can perform Swan Lake on one night and a Shechter on the next. But I suppose no matter what he does, he will always be criticized! Part of the job! I just know that I felt such a strong energy from the dancers which to me seemed to signal their relief that they have the opportunity to engage with this type of choreography as well as 'normal' ballet. After all, it is the Royal Ballet's incredible repertoire which makes them so in demand. 

 

We forget sometimes that dance and ballet is an art form and is therefore subjective. There are things we will like and things that we won't, however, surely it's important to be faced with an array of work. I think that witnessing dance that you might dislike strongly is just as important as it broadens the mind and widens your experiences. Surely that is what art is all about? 

Thanks for your excellent post.  I attended the performance and enjoyed the new work immensely, only to have my joy somewhat sat upon by posters on this board who find it necessary to devalue others enjoyment.  I have no idea if Shechter is fashionable, nor do I have a view on Kevin O'Hare's thought process.  Similarly, I am not a Shecter groupie.  I can well appreciate that some people did not enjoy the work and I am always interested to hear their views.  I didn't 'get' Song of the Earth which, for me, never took off, but I can appreciate it as a beautiful piece that gives great pleasure to many.

 

I welcome ROH's decision to commission exciting new works, even if Mr. Macgregor doesn't often hit the spot for me.  Long may it continue.

[zxDaveM]

I'm very open to new works ......though not going to this triple bill....but I was disappointed to read that Schechter himself was not keen to have principal dancers for this work. Why was that?

 

My take is that if he is used to using a group of dancers as a whole group(no hierarchy) then why couldn't he treat the Royal in the same way. He could then see which dancers were most adapting to his style before choosing his final caste.

 

 

 

 

perhaps the corps are more used to moving 'as a whole'

[LinMM]

Well like in any group of people some will adapt quicker to new things than others. Some may need longer. So the choreographer who often doesn't have a great deal of time to teach and rehearse a group even for a new work would have to choose the quickest adapters to perform etc etc.

 

But I 'd have a good bet that most Royal dancers ....at a party say ...could jive/twist/ salsa and generally cavort around with the best of us!! But yes agree if had NEVER done any sort of contemporary ever .......pretty unusual these days.....might find adapting to that style

more difficult.

 

Most good contemporary companies have dancers who still do ballet class as part of their routine.....The Rambert are fabulous in ballet class for example......so most dancers these days have had experience of both.

 

But some contemporaries don't keep up with ballet(and why should they) but these dancers I would say would find it very hard then to do a "ballet" work justice. It's probably marginally easier for ballet trained to do contemporary as a general rule.

 

Sorry going off thread here but I am very pleased that different types of choreographers are given the chance to work with the Royal.

[LinMM]

ZxDaveM ....a good point!!

 

Perhaps Schechter was quick to understand this!!

[Mary]

Thank you for the clarification Alison.  I must have looked at that thread while it was locked and had not noticed that it had been re-opened.  

 

Without denigrating the skills of RB dancers, I would respectfully disagree that any of them would be capable of adapting to Schechter's style.  The very best contemporary dancers have had years of training in their art and I would no more expect ballet dancers to pick up contemporary dance quickly any more than I would expect contemporary dancers to churn out a brilliant Swan Lake or Sleeping Beauty with only a few weeks work.  It is not the case that ballet is the technical pinnacle of the artform with everything else beneath it.  These are separate (although related) skills and those ballet dancers who have had very little contemporary work incorporated into their training (more likely amongst older dancers or those trained in Eastern Europe where curriculums tend to be more rigidly classical) may find it extremely difficult to adapt - the language is simply not in their bodies.  

That is what I'd always thought, which is why I'd prefer to see them really use the training they have to perform ballet works, rather than have to spend a lot of time- "months" did someone say ?- trying to unlearn their training and  "adapt" to do something else..it just seems  a bit wasteful- especially when you consider how short a dancer's life can be.

 

Why is there perceived to be some moral virtue or political necessity in making ballet dancers dance other styles?

 

I feel it is entirely possible that new ballets using the ballet language could be genuinely interesting and engaged with the world. Why not? True, there are some small ballet companies whose presentations do feel a bit fossilised at times but golly that's true in all the performing arts.

 

Most of us on the forum want to see new work and we also want to see a much wider rep in the RB, not just 2 or 3 classics. I am often to be found boring the forum on the subject of encouraging young female choreographic talent in the RB- they should do more of this.

 

Noone is saying ballet is superior, but it is a specific art many love and want to see- and indeed can't get enough of, which you only have to skim the forum for half an hour to gather!

[Sunrise]

I do think it is important the Royal Ballet, being the recipient of a disproprotionately large amount of funding should take risks, if only because they can afford to. Even if the work is perceived a failure I think we as the audience need to be challenged, and the dancers may well want the challenge of trying non-ballet styles too. Creating a few sparks now could sow the seeds for other great works and other choreographers in the future. So I think sacrificing one third of one triple bill seems a small price to pay. ☺

[Nina G.]

Sunrise would you care explaining why you think ROH/RB is  "....the recipient of a disproprotionately large amount of funding....", on what do you base your statement on? 

[Lindsay]

The Arts Council funding list is public Nina and the ROH receives the largest single grant (I think £25m in the last round - the list is on the Arts Council website). I know of many small arts organisations which went under following the last round of cuts who would consider that disproportionate.

 

I also think that was a reasonable (if debatable) statement for Sunrise to make without you jumping down his/her throat. If you felt the need to ask for clarification you could have done so politely.

[aileen]

Just back from this triple bill (I didn't stay for Song). I haven't seen 4T before and so I don't know what it should be like. It seemed a little prim/coy to me with the exception of Zenaida who was great in her role with the right amount of attack and authority on the stage. I enjoyed Untouchable, which received a lot of applause - more than 4T. The music was interesting (I liked the middle eastern themes) and it was very well danced and staged. There was a fair amount of variety in the patterns as viewed from the amphitheatre. I don't know what the meaning of the piece is meant to be. Is the title a reference to the caste system in India? Whether the piece repays subsequent viewings remains to be seen.

[Nina G.]

The Arts Council funding list is public Nina and the ROH receives the largest single grant (I think £25m in the last round - the list is on the Arts Council website). I know of many small arts organisations which went under following the last round of cuts who would consider that disproportionate.

 

I also think that was a reasonable (if debatable) statement for Sunrise to make without you jumping down his/her throat. If you felt the need to ask for clarification you could have done so politely.

 

????

 

My question is a perfectly polite one, maybe I should have added "please"... and asking a question does not mean "jumping down ones throat" dear Lindsay. I ask questions all the time whenever I wish to be better informed or whenever things are not so clear to me. 

[Lindsay]

If you had said please or prefaced your question with a neutral phrase such as "that's interesting" then the tone of your post would have been entirely different. As would your subsequent post if you had omitted the sarcastic "dear".

[ToThePointe]

I hardly think it is "wasteful" for the company to spend time on works which encourage a different style. As I said previously, I'm sure that these opportunities are what make them thrive and inspired and I can't imagine many in the company thinking it a waste of time. I find it interesting how some take the view that the company should stick to a balletic style. Sorry to get all philosophical but what even constitutes ballet? The Rite of Spring is certainly contemporary and that's in the RB's rep, and much of Balanchine, for me, owns itself more to the contemporary style than a traditionally balletic one...

[Nina G.]

If you had said please or prefaced your question with a neutral phrase such as "that's interesting" then the tone of your post would have been entirely different. As would your subsequent post if you had omitted the sarcastic "dear".

 

I do not appreciate at all being told by you what I can/cannot say and how to say it. I wasn't rude, wasn't un-PC, etc.  

I call many people "dear" and there is nothing sarcastic in it. There is no "tone" in my post 79, that's purely your interpretation. 

 

I have been a Forum Member for well over a decade and I find it an increasingly unpleasant place to post ones opinion (or even ask a question).

 

Anjuli bowed out for a similar reason, I think I may follow suit.  To be lectured by you is totally unacceptable.

[capybara]

Getting back to the Triple Bill, I just want to record quickly that I really enjoyed the Shechter. It was much enhanced for me by being strongly cast from among the lower ranks (apart from Hayward, Whitehead, Stix-Brunell, and McNally who were all great) with Matthew Ball outstanding.

[Bruce Wall]

Just a brief note about tonight's (30.3.15) Triple Bill performance.  Muntagirov was a true revelation in the First Melancholic Variation of THE FOUR TEMPERAMENTS.  His performance was one of exquisite form; fully expressing Hindemith's musical demands replete with all of that score's richly spiked grace notes - even when the actual rendition in the pit - as it sometimes sounded - appeared to be pasteurized.  The RB has much to be proud of in this young man.  There can be no question but that from a Balanchinian perspective Muntagirov is a defining boon.  Bonelli again shone as he had on the first night but oh, how I wished that Naghdi had gotten a chance to lead the female division of the Sanguinic campaign after Osipova's minor injury.  She WHOLLY deserves to as evidenced by her characterful effervescence here.  Eric Underwood was not as clear in focus as Watson had been in Phelegmatic ... largely I think because he was simply too loose, much as Albert Evans had often been in the same assignment at NYCB.  Zenaida Yanowsky was again spiritedly pointed in her Choleric thrill.

 

UNTOUCHABLE had the same cast as on the opening, although I did notice that several people disappeared after the initial lights out at the end (James Hay among them).  The audience again were in a sincere reverie and, on the whole, I must say I enjoyed it more than I had done on Friday .... perhaps because I now (i) know better what to expect and (ii) know how to best focus/level my observational regard.

 

SONG OF THE EARTH saw an exquisite performance this evening - certainly one much better framed than the opening effort had been.  This was - from my perspective - largely due to a much more evenly cast trio of leading players - although the entire supporting team seemed to benefit from the previous evening's outings and Thomas Randle was a very welcome addition as the tenor in a wonderfully rich dramatic flow.  What a stunning ballet it is.  Like FOUR TEMPERAMENTS - it espouses the wit and genius of a true master and surely helped define the balletic idiom for the last century.  Both works have, after all, already withstood the test of time.  This is, I think, one of my favourite MacMillan ballets.  Laura Morera as the female lead veritably defined loss and was every bit as searing as Leanne Benjamin had been in this intoxicating role.  Morera elicited soul by exorting, educing and squeezing our hearts.  There is no question but that she had the advantage of a partner of much stronger lyrical stealth/line than Soares had provided last week in Kish and that Watson was oh, so much more clear in his dramatic evolution as the Messenger of Death.  Here the work - as it should - shone in its entirety rather than in parts.  I so hope that Morera gets at least one outing in this treasure in New York.  From my perspective she is owed it.  

Edited March 30, 2015 by Bruce Wall

[Lindsay]

I do not see why longevity is relevant Nina G but since you bring it up I was posting on the old forum (under another name) from the period before Ross Stretton was appointed. I rarely post nowadays because most of the interesting people who used to post informed criticism seem to have left and any attempt to discuss dance in a wider social or historical context is met by horrified cries of "politics" (led by you last week on the Swan Lake thread if I recall correctly) or snappy, superior responses which sends many new posters packing.

 

It is however great that the Doing Dance area is thriving as a valuable resource for many under the new regime and informative threads such as that on dance in Germany and Austria are extremely welcome.

[LinMM]

I must apologise for spelling Shechters name incorrectly in above posts.

I was looking on the ROH website to see if there was any info on what Hofesh was intending with this ballet.

 

Were there any programme notes on it?

 

I imagine Untouchable is a reference to the fact that there always seem to be some people on the edge of any society who are not accepted by that society as a whole.....not accepted by the main group etc.

[alison]

Can we have an end to the sniping please, and get this thread back on course? I can well understand why people find it an "unpleasant" and "unwelcoming" place to post if longstanding members start taking potshots at each other.

 

Thank you.

[Nina G.]

Please let's get back to what this Topic is all about Lindsay. Thank you. 

 

Further comments are of no use and our posts are completely irrelevant to this Topic.

("Horrified cries of politics"??? Please).

 

Count me out of this discussion. Those interesting people have all left for a good reason...Thank you.

[aileen]

A couple of people have queried whether Schechter's work would have looked the same on a contemporary company, say Rambert, and whether Schechter altered his choreography in any way because he was creating a work for a classical ballet company. I wondered whether Akram Khan and Russell Maliphant had made any concessions to the fact that they were creating work for a ballet company when they choreographed their pieces for ENB's Lest We Forget programme last year. MacMillan's Rite of Spring does not, I think, have any of the ballet idiom in it and I assume that the 'original' Rite of Spring created for the Ballets Russes did not either.

[Jan McNulty]

Good point Aileen!  Does anyone know?

 

When Mark Baldwin was an associate choreographer with Scottish Ballet many years ago he created works in the ballet idiom with the ladies on point.  I remember Aye Fond Kiss with particular fondness.

[alison]

I have to say, "Untouchable" to my mind looks better seen from upstairs - you can actually see the dancers as individuals, rather than as a seething mass, and the patterning is much more apparent.

[aileen]

I was wondering whether Untouchable is better seen from above. However, I imagine that if you are close to the stage the piece makes a powerful impact too.

[Bruce Wall]

A couple of people have queried whether Schechter's work would have looked the same on a contemporary company, say Rambert, and whether Schechter altered his choreography in any way because he was creating a work for a classical ballet company. I wondered whether Akram Khan and Russell Maliphant had made any concessions to the fact that they were creating work for a ballet company when they choreographed their pieces for ENB's Lest We Forget programme last year. MacMillan's Rite of Spring does not, I think, have any of the ballet idiom in it and I assume that the 'original' Rite of Spring created for the Ballets Russes did not either.

 

Aileen, I think the point - at least as far as I was trying to reference it - (and I certainly wouldn't want to begin to speak for any other 'couple' you speak of here) - was the fact that the programme - this triple bill - was balanced between Balanchine's 4Ts and MacMillian's stunning Song of the Earth.  That is all.  I was speaking of its overall construct.  I think the framing by ENB of the Lest We Forget programme - one about which I wrote about admiringly on more than one occasion on the appropriate Board - was truly stunning and vividly enforced the key achievements of Rojo's brilliant leadership.  Indeed, I think Scarlett's No Man's Land was his finest work that we have seen since his fourth choreographed piece, Asphodel Meadows, in 2010.  I thought too Malphant's PDD for Cojocaru and Souza in Second Breath was vivid in its telling detail and did very much succeed in joining two art forms.  The ravishing forward development wrought via ENB's two way access with Kahn in Dust was also evident from my perspective - certainly in that potent snare of that final union between Rojo and the choreographer himself.  I believe both of these contemporary artists have spoken of the impact of such on their artistry.  It was, at least for me, a joy to behold.  I so look forward to Kahn's imagining of Giselle next year.  I know it will be innovative in its instruction at the very least.  

Edited March 30, 2015 by Bruce Wall

[serenade]

Went to see this tonight....really enjoyed it except for the middle bit   !  

 

My thoughts are:

 

The Four Temperaments: unfortunately had a pretty bad view for this one due to the fact I paid £6 for my ticket   They seemed to dance in the bit of the stage I couldn't see for the first half but the second half my view improved and I enjoyed what I did see.  I do like a bit of Balanchine.  Music was great too...I will have to find it.

 

Untouchable:  the only positive I could say about this one is some of the music was quite funky but I found the whole thing a bit rubbish really!  I think it's a real shame that this was on instead of some ballet.  Ballet to me is what it is, an art form completely different to anything else that's stood the test of time-  it's never going to be cool or edgy and that's ok!  I feel like they think to be experimental is to bring new forms of dance onto a ballet stage but that's not being experimental in the realms of ballet- that's just showing us different forms of dance when we've paid to see ballet!  It got a huge applause though and I heard everyone around me talking about how great it was so I wonder if more people do want to see this kind of work at the ROH?  

 

Song of the Earth:  I loved it so much!  It was just gorgeous, could happily watch it again!  Everyone danced beautifully!

[Lindsay]

As I recall in the ENB programme the Scarlett was as you would expect purely balletic, Maliphant moved the language further along the spectrum towards a contemporary language and Khan's piece was more firmly rooted in his own tradition which, as Bruce said, made the evening an interesting progression (if you ignore the rather random firebird which popped up in the middle).

 

I think Khan's language is as distant from "traditional" ballet as Schechter's but maybe the contrasts seemed less stark in Dust, because the music/pace was less "challenging" than Untouchable and the pas de deux with Rojo also indicated a coming together of her roots with Khan's (indeed the very form of a pas de deux will have been a point of reference for ballet watchers). The corps work in that ballet was it seems to me based on some of the same ideas as Untouchable - a faceless tribe buffeted by conflict (although Schechter's tribe were perhaps a more postmodern gang, doing a rather better job of standing up for themselves than Khan's historically rooted victims)

[aileen]

Am I right in thinking that Maliphant was at one time a classical ballet dancer? If so, then perhaps that's why the choreography in Second Breath was in the middle of the line between traditional classical ballet and contemporary dance.

 

I was thinking tonight that the men and women in Untouchable were interchangeable (as they were in the corps for Dust). I believe that there were more men than women in the work but I assume that this was just how it worked out when Schechter chose the dancers whom he regarded as most suitable for his choreography, rather than by design. As has been mentioned previously, there are no hierarchies in the work and neither are there any gender roles.

[John Mallinson]

Am I right in thinking that Maliphant was at one time a classical ballet dancer? If so, then perhaps that's why the choreography in Second Breath was in the middle of the line between traditional classical ballet and contemporary dance.

Yes, RBS trained, then SWRB before moving away from ballet.

[MAB]

Akram Khan is of course steeped in classical Indian dance, a genre with a history and technique comparable to European classical ballet.  I have possibly enjoyed his Indian programmes more than his modern ones.  Somehow I feel working with a classical group was less of a challenge to him than it would be with other modern choreographers.  I loved his use of the corps de ballet in Dust, but not sure if he had had much experience with such a large group of dancers in the past,  I hadn't seen him work with such large numbers before.

[alison]

Apart from the Olympics opening ceremony?