bridiem

Rothbart's outfit is only quasi-military, and as you say he doesn't salute back. Maybe he's just someone with so much authority at court that he's treated as a military person would normally be treated. Either way there's clearly a power struggle between him and Siegfried from the outset - Siegfried salutes him, and reluctantly complies with his wishes/orders in the early part of Act I, but when Rothbart tries to stop him going off hunting/to the lake (can't remember exactly) Siegfried does hold his ground and effectively dismisses Rothbart. I find that interesting and it all works for me (even if I can't quite work it out!).

Well there can be some good, for the reasons you list above; but I don't think only good. And I just think it's strange. This is a performing company, and good dancers will get opportunities and coaching and tests of nerve and plaudits etc in due course anyway. That's what the company exists for - to perform for audiences, not to compete with each other. But, if the dancers do like it (including those who aren't nominated, and/or don't win) I suppose it's OK. Not that they have any choice in the matter, presumably.

Impressive work, Saodan! Many thanks. Calvert (with Kaneko) was a Big Swan for Lamb on Tuesday. I see that all the Bennos are on the short side, and yet the sisters include quite a few tall dancers and sometimes taller and shorter in the same pairing. Seems a bit odd to me. (Not that the man always has to be tallest - but in partnering terms it obviously matters, and the choreography for the sisters seems to me to be less suited to tall dancers.) Or, Benno could perhaps sometimes be danced by someone taller. (Though maybe then there really would be confusion with the prince, who has generally been on the tall side.)

Exactly - where there is a clear conflict of interests, it should be declared and the mechanism for dealing with it outlined. (I'm not talking about any particular individual/s here - it's a general and I would have thought obvious point if the prizes are to have any credibility.)

That's partly why I don't like the idea of this competition (though I admit I have occasionally voted in it!). Dancers in the same company shouldn't be pitted against each other in this way, even in a spirit of good nature (which I hope exists).

Yes; all being a 'professional' critic means is that you have managed to get someone to pay you for what you write. You then become subject to their constraints in terms of length, style, etc, so you can no longer write as freely. And you have to go to performances you may not otherwise choose to attend. 'Amateur' writers may be just as good as/knowledgeable as paid critics - they just don't get paid for it. And many critics clearly don't have huge depth of technical knowledge - like everyone else, they have mainly learned (we hope) by watching, reading and absorbing. The only thing that matters is the quality of the writing, not whether or not someone has been paid to write it.

And now the Jubilee line strike has been suspended.

In fact the District Line strike has been suspended and services will run as normal. The Jubilee line strike is still on and there will be no services if it does go ahead.

Me too - he's like a piece of slime. Or perhaps lakeweed.

Yes - see my post further up. But also previous comments re the length and rigour of dancers' training, the shortness of their careers, and the exceptional level of talent required. I realise that if society doesn't really value dancers (as it clearly doesn't really value many other jobs, for reasons I fail to understand), that will be reflected in their pay. I personally do value them and so would like to see them being better paid. But that's not really the point - I just understand why Polunin might feel that dancers don't earn enough.

I completely agree with you, Sharon. A lot of what I think are the most important jobs are amongst the least well paid (and vice versa). But I can understand why Polunin would be frustrated at the situation in respect of dancers.

They also by the nature of the job work late into the evening (in a very physical occupation) and so it's not good if they then have a long journey home or have unsatisfactory/insecure accommodation. And by the mere fact that they are working as professional dancers, they must be incredibly talented (even at the 'lowest' level). So I also empathize with him in this respect.

Thanks for your very interesting thoughts, JohnS. I agree very much about the multi tasking, especially given the number of dancers yesterday evening who had also been heavily involved in the matinée. I think that your proposed change to the ending, though not fundamental enough for my preferences, would certainly be an improvement on the current one. (One of the moments I do miss from the former production was towards the end of Act 4, when Odette and Siegfried together confronted Rothbart as if to say 'No! You will not win! We will vanquish you!' to the most powerful, dramatic music. I really yearn for that clear, decisive act of self-sacrifice on both their parts.)

Interesting comments, Saodan. I would say that the role of the man in classical ballet changed a long time ago and that being only an understated support to the ballerina is no longer enough. I don't think that being neat, tidy and assured is enough to carry a principal role in a major company (just about any of the men in the RB could do the role if that was all that was required). I personally don't like dancers who are what I would call showy; but I need to see why they are there.

Job done. And thank you for your wonderfully vivid and perceptive account of Yasmine Naghdi's performance (and the rest of the matinée).

Yes, it was brilliant! My sister who was also there last night said that it was if she was in a state of panic as she turned and turned - and then was a swan.

I often forget that we aren't actually watching the swans! We only see the maidens, who are swan-like to indicate their terrible situation/the spell under which they are living. In fact, the synopsis for the new production encourages that confusion - for the last act, it says 'the swans anxiously await Odette's return' and that she is 'doomed to remain a swan forever'. In fact she's doomed to remain under the spell forever, not to remain a swan forever. The only time we see her (or anyone else!) as a swan is when she glides off stage at the end of Act 2. (Though even the maidens seem to pretty well under Rothbart's control, it has to be said. They don't seem to be able to go off shopping or getting their hair done or other such maidenly pastimes.)

I was very frustrated by the matinée performance yesterday, because I thought that Naghdi danced beautifully but from Kish I got nothing at all. I found him bland, pallid, unconvincing and technically underpowered, and there was absolutely no chemistry between them. So Naghdi was effectively performing in a vacuum, which was a terrible shame. She gave it her all (and in the fouettés almost more than her all! Though the ambition was admirable). Gary Avis was a compelling Rothbart. I thought as others have commented that the pas de troix dancers were poorly matched. Ella and Gasparini are so much shorter than Heap that it did none of them any favours. The evening performance was stunning, with Osipova on full throttle right from the outset - tremendously expressive and exciting. I thought that Matthew Ball danced beautifully and seemed to be stunned by what he was experiencing/witnessing (with good reason!). I hope that in future performances he will develop a more detailed characterisation, in so far as this production allows. Avis again an evil and charismatic Rothbart. And Campbell superb as Benno (I kept wondering why on earth this beautiful dancer hasn't been cast as Siegfried).

I like the enlarged role for Benno, but I think the fact that on opening night Muntagirov was Siegfried meant that I didn't feel his role was diminished - Muntagirov is so compelling and danced so brilliantly that he commanded automatic attention. But in subsequent performances I have found it to be a problem. Benno is far more prominent than Siegfried in Act 1, which must be a bit confusing for newcomers to the ballet and does mean that Siegfried takes ages to come into any sort of prominence. I don't find the role of Rothbart problematic. I think that by deceiving Siegfried, and his mother, Rothbart has been confirmed in his evil power and so his hold over the court, and is now in a position to grab the crown. (In spite of the more realistic elements, this is still a fairy tale after all.) I find the end of Act 3 absolutely thrilling. I completely agree about the end - beautifully expressed. This production is never going to be as moving as it should be without the resolution dictated by the music.

And they were absolutely thrilling! And seemed more creative somehow than the usual fouettés - it was as if she was spinning her web of evil round Siegfried at a ferocious speed.

??? Is this really all there is to say of it??

Brilliant! Thank you MRR for the fascinating review and beautiful collage.

I don't remember it like this, though I agree there may have been some 'business' that could usefully have been lost. I remember it as exquisite and pure and incredibly moving. And I loved Act 4. I think Dowell's production aimed to be a more authentic choreographic text.

There's a lot I'll miss about the old production. In spite of its problems, I grew very fond of it over the years and it packed a huge emotional punch. So thank you to Anthony Dowell et al who have received too much criticism recently in the run up to the new production. (I don't mean on this forum but in the press generally.)

It also engages the audience's interest and sympathy, so they're rooting for the replacement dancer instead of missing the replaced one. So it's good psychology as well as good manners.