Mary

Best: Vadim Muntagirov

Worst: Having to miss some of his performances.

The first thing I do on arrival is dash to the programme  stand for a cast sheet and ask- any changes? if there are no slips in sight.

I must say in justice to the ROH  that in many many years I have never failed to get a cast change slip- on each level of the House. I find their arrangements in this respect far and away better than other theatres where it is sometimes hard to get even a cast list.

Being very very slow to catch up I have only just watched the Darcey Bussell programme, but very much enjoyed it:  it brought back so many memories.

Some have commented that she was not the best actor or the most emotional dancer.

I do remember very vividly her last performance in Song of the Earth and it was the most compelling performance I have seen of that ballet. She was wonderful.

I so much enjoyed seeing something of the lovely Johnny Cope. Tryst was a very fine piece and would make a good revival-  watching it now it seems ahead of its time, and it certainly had a lot of publicity and was a great success I think.  Perhaps more could have been made of their partnership as it was a long one, central to the RB for years,  and they were perfectly matched in physique. Their exchanges in rehearsal - and one poignant interview before her last performance-showed a very down- to- earth relationship quite unlike the popular image of ballet dancers-maybe that is why that documentary won't get made!

It would have been interesting to hear a bit more about Bussell's own role models and mentors.  The programme gave rather the impression that she did it all herself.

The programme did give us a lot of ballet, and not too much feeble chat.  It wasn't perfect of course.... to cut away from that sublime work Symphony in C, to show Bussell hugging Mr Blobby...........words fail me.

But I am very grateful to the BBC for these enjoyable documentaries this Xmas.

One never knows of course what has been offered and not accepted- not everyone wants to take part.

I just caught up with the Nutcracker documentary and really enjoyed it.

For me Campbell was the star of the show! what a completely charming man -and I love his dancing so it was a treat to see him preparing the role. he is fine partner.

I do agree with those who suggest that just a little less about Hayward- lovely dancer as she is- and  a little more on others would have improved it. But also, I wonder if it is really always wise or kind to boost people up so VERY much so early in their careers.

A little mystique is also a good thing for a ballerina.  One reason Fonteyn was so great is that she kept the mask on. Like the Queen.

However, it was interesting, moving and very entertaining to see the chlldren - who were a credit to the school- and the whole company working together as a team with such dedication. Thank goodness the trend for 'knocking' documentaries seems to have passed.

Seconded all round- it was such a pleasure to watch a good documentary that didn't treat the audience like idiots. So full of the most tantalising footage. Also very heart-warming.

I was especially taken with what Sir Peter said about narrative ballets, so many  being far too complex and not trusting the dance to 'tell a story' and take the audience with the dance by giving key moments time and space to register. Good point.

I have never liked the way, in his BRB production,  Clara joins in in the Kingdom of the Sweets, but it was interesting to hear him and John Macfarlane explain why it is like that in their production. This kind of detailed focus on the real nitty gritty was so welcome. This film could have been 3 times as long and held my attention!

I will miss this supremely elegant dancer greatly. She has been wonderful in many things: The Winter's Tale though comes to mind most recently, where she absolutely shone.

Yes, most enjoyable, and though I often listen to this excellent programme, I don't think I have ever heard a guest who struck me as so completely and utterly devoted to his or her career. 

He always seems a most charming  and very self deprecating man, and when I met him very briefly once I was  surprised by the contrast between the quiet 'ordinariness' of Mr Watson off-stage and the sometimes incredible, fantastic and intense stage presence.

Thanks Bruce- shame the prices might rule it out;  golly they are steep.

Thanks so much Alison for saving me this chore.

Not much, is it.

I jotted it all down in shorthand in my notebook.

I think they produce a 6ft cast 'board' placed on the ground floor bar/foyer area.

so handy to slip into my handbag!

Hmm, not ideal when one wants to write a review on the forum next day....

It sounds rather gross-!!Thanks.

Very much enjoying reading these reviews- I am wondering, not having seen this production, what was so especially ghastly about this -evidently universally reviled!-  version of the Arabian dance?

Yes -and many of us have been seeing his work every year for 10 years so I don't think people are making hasty or thoughtless judgements..in fact, very considered judgements.

I find myself wondering what Monica Mason was thinking when she appointed Wayne McGregor in the first place.  Was it bums on seats?  I know nothing about his history prior to his RB appointment. Did he have a huge following already?  Was the thinking that a new audience, who had never visited the Opera House before, would walk through the doors and find out that ballet was really not as highbrow as they thought?  I do hope that it wasn't some sort of pressure from somewhere, that said that ballet wasn't relevant to young people today, and the RB needed to "modernise" in order to appeal to the next generation.

A good thing to get people in, but the problem is, it isn't ballet ( in my view-but does anyone think it is?) so in a sense it hasn't persuaded a new audience to watch ballet.

Yes, that's very interesting, Jamesrhblack. Though I still didn't necessarily think it encouraged us to see the first two acts as artificial memory - just as the memory of someone who was now in a very different state, and with the implication that she was Anastasia (since the film freezes on her). I thought that the off-kilter elements of the sets etc were (as in Mayerling) an indication of a crumbling dynasty, not of a crumbling mind. And nothing in the choreography or the narrative of these two acts suggests that they are not real or true - it's all pretty naturalistic (if that's the right word) and is danced as such. So even with the imposed intro, I don't think the work hangs together or that it's possible for the Anastasias to give a coherent performance (though it sounds as if they've all given it a very good go!).

Precisely. The whole problem, for me, is in the lack of integration of the acts in this sense. There is nothing in Act 1 to tell you this IS a memory let alone a false or disturbed one. In this sense it ranks with the 'it was all a dream' as a very weak narrative device indeed....

Saw Morera this evening and thought she was stunningly good. She reminded me of Benjamin in the role. I found her performance much more heart-rending than Osipova's ( superb as that was). What a really wonderful actor-dancer she is.

But also, as someone has said already- Bruce?- Hirano's Rasputin is so good it actually adds a new dimension and brings things to life- he conveys  a powerful aura and a sense that all is very much not well in the family circle (!)-  using a focused stillness to project with great power even when not dancing.

Gartside also made a subtle difference to the scenes he was in by being so in character: he was the only one in Act 1 who was a naval officer dancing, rather than a dancer in uniform. Sambe's solo was fantastic- perfectly controlled, neat, spot on and elegant- lovely.

One or two other things struck me. People rarely say that Macmillan was influenced by Ashton but he was I believe ( naturally enough) No doubt many will correct me but I really saw that in Act 2 tonight- in the graceful dance with Anastasia and the Tsarina , and the 'scarf/ribbon dance' that follows.

The orchestra were on form tonight and that possibly helped to make the evening much more powerful; I am still not quite convinced by the work as a whole- but watching Act 1 and 2 with Act 3 in mind does really help.

Takada and Hay gave a good account of the  pas de deux I thought though it still looked uncomfortable- (was it the costume making Hay look strangely hunched?)

 So sorry to miss McRae in this- but no doubt anyway he now has better things to do for a bit. Good luck to him and hurry back.

I can highly recommend a complete news fast for several days or ideally a week.

i do this regularly now and find it psychologically necessary to prevent being driven mad by today's media ( even the best of it is hysterical).

Anyway, Ballet Forum keeps me up to date with all the really important news.

Great evening - great reception for Wayne after new work and at the end when KOH thanked him for his contribution over last 10 years.

 

Quick thoughts:

 

Chroma - fresher, newer and weightier thanks to amazing addition of Alvin Ailey dancers. Liked it more than before - and in the context of a "trumped up world" a wonderful example of a magic mix of people.

 

Multiverse - it'll split the critics I think. I liked it - the dancing terrific - total commitment to the work. There were so many moments of quiet brilliance amongst the more angst driven stretches of choreography. The set incredible - the music wonderful but demanding at times. The mix of emotion and knife-edge dancing can be head-slamming - I'd have loved to see it again to get a better idea.

 

Carbon Life- liked it far more than last time round - ode to Michael Clark but very enjoyable.

 

Anyway, money well spent!

'Head-slamming'= not sure I feel up to that at the moment..do you mean the sheer volume?  Were there lots of flashing lights?

I do sympathise greatly with ROH in their need to make money , and in the current climate, with cuts, they must be trying to maximise income from these sources.

But they do need to be careful to remember that we go there because it is an exceedingly fine opera house, not a 'mall' and not in fact even a classy restaurant.

it is rather bad if they can't listen to some constructive criticism Vanartus, (and I look forward to trying out Munich's delights!)

Last time I went I thought the amphi bar was much better -after a phase last year of being packed with tables for diners, it was back to being a space to drink and chat- I even got a table-but possibly that was just the start of the season.

Many regulars have a sandwich (and a small M&S bottle of wine, very handy)- on the terrace in summer-probably because they can't afford otherwise after paying for tickets and travel. Even Pizza Express is  not that cheap as the one next door never seems to accept those wonderful vouchers. I used to love Cafe des Amis basement with its cosy atmosphere- omelette and frites for £7, lovely  ballet photos. Gone now alas.

The amphi restaurant is by no means always full. Maybe it should offer more in the way of quick, more affordable light suppers? 'An omelette and a glass of wine'?

In fact, maybe a Friends special menu would be nice or a small discount to encourage us? ( Forum Special: macaroni cheese and a cup of tea -5 bob):-)

Sexist.

No, not sexist at all.

The built environment is overwhelmingly designed and built  by men. Very often, it turns out not to be  very user -friendly, especially  for women. Often women- espeically those with young children or the older and more frail- struggle with badly designed buildings especially toilets- a good example was the awful Ladies at Kings Cross station down a steep flight of concrete stairs- where I have often had to help women carry prams etc-thankfully now defunct.

That is what is sexist.

Things are getting better, slowly it is true . But often male architects have not been good at understanding women's needs.

Men should not be allowed to design women's toilets.

I fear some aspects of the 'open-up' scheme are in fact, as Floss says,  to do with caterers making money,- this is perhaps understandable but I don't have to like it.

A survey I have just been sent about the scheme is all about the shop,  restaurants and bars. It asks what would make me go to them more often and crucially, go to them even when not attending a performance. 'Why do I not go more often-? ' my answer was easy- Expense.

When I do go it is for a rare treat and I go because of the venue not because 'a famous chef' is in attendance or  'People are talking about the destination'-choices I was offered.

Opening up the restaurants more to a non-theatre crowd is not being egalitarian as only rich people can afford to eat there.

The survey also asked about closing in the terrace to turn it into a restaurant- I was glad to be able to say how very sorry this would make me. Some fresh air in the interval and beforehand- the wonderful view- this is a marvellous space and it is open and free to all ( including during the day often) already. If 'open up' means 'close it in and charge £50 a head' I am not in favour.

Absolutely agree- it was very annoying at the end of Anastasia and quite wrong that Osipova was replaced by- whoever on earth that chap is!-on the screen- a really jarring moment.

Great fun to see the (recorded) Bright Stream this afternoon- just the thing for a cold, very wet November day.  Most amusing: anyone else go? It was worth it just for the surreal scene when giant courgettes are carried on to the stage.

Seriously it was worth it for the wonderful dancing and comic acting especially of Maria Alexandrova and Ruslan Skvortsov,  the exquisite lines of Svetlana Lunkina, and the joyous music.

Of course, one wishes all the screenings were live rather than slightly old re-runs. But it beats doing the ironing.