The Royal Ballet announces the appointment, as from today, of Wayne McGregor as its resident choreographer.

Interesting. McGregor's Chroma has been a big hit in the RB's latest triple bill but he works outside the classical tradition. He's also scheduled to make a piece for POB soon.

I just heard about this about an hour ago and still haven't fully got my mind around it. I liked Chroma, and do like what I've seen of Qualia... but it's all just so...well, for the Royal, out there.

I don't think that it should be read as a huge statement about the future of the Royal Ballet, as in some sort of abandonment of the past or so - I'm sure we'll have a huge number of Sleeping Beauty performances in all the years to come. But at the same time, I do wonder how much of an impact it will have on style - Qualia and Chroma highlight and *require* hypermobility... And (as those who know me know!), that's not a 'pathway to the future' or 'mark of the modern' that I'm even remotely happy with.

I do think it's an interesting, provocative, and exciting announcement. Beyond that, I'm still trying to figure out what I think of it!

Chroma was an interesting novelty and worth doing, but what benefit does the Royal get from this arrangement that they weren't getting from individual commissions?

When I first saw the title of this thread, I thought it would be Wheeldon. From an outsiders point of view, I hadn't read enough about McGregor's work with the RB to suggest that the relationship was long or strong enough to predict this appointment.

Exactly. And if he really does serve as a resident choreographer -- not just making one ballet a year, but making a lot of ballets and working with the dancers on a regular basis, which is what a resident choreographer like, oh, say, Ashton or MacMillan, did -- what this means is that within a few years, all of the ballets in the repertory will begin to look like McGregor ballets and he'll change the style. Why else have a resident choreographer? His works should be the native language of the company.

After re-reading the press announcement, I get the feeling that Mason does plan for McGregor to have a broad role, but not one in line of Ashton or MacMillan. The things mentioned prominently are education, technology and collaboration. It's a guess, but I think she sees him as a one-man experimental wing for the company who can also serve as a liason between the main company and activities at the Linbury and Clore as well as the wider British dance community. The idea of McGregor assuming the role of even an Ashley Page doesn't thrill me (not that Page did it better than McGregor would) but Mason's done more things right than wrong so far; I'm willing to wait and see what actually happens.

The full press release is now up on the Royal Opera House website at

http://info.royaloperahouse.org/News/Index.cfm?ccs=1109

I ‘m not sure whether the company actually has a native language anymore as the old Royal Ballet style has all but disappeared. Chroma was a massive box office hit, but its worth asking if those long queues for tickets were made up of people eager to see the new Wayne McGregor or whether it was the affordable ticket prices being charged for that particular programme that was causing a stampede. One way or another though, Chroma was a massive hit and perhaps the RB management thinks its struck box office gold at last.

The RB has been flirting with McGregor for some time now starting off with a programme with some of the company along with dancers from his own group at the ROH's smaller auditorium, the Lindbury, before creating work for the main house. I'm wondering if this is a first move away from classical ballet and towards the POB model. The dearth of classical choreographers is nothing less than a global crisis and new work has to come from somewhere. Also there are now dancers within the RB, e.g. Watson, Galeazzi, Yanovsky, that are more impressive in the modern rep than the classical and several more that excel in these crossover works.

I would have put money on Christopher Wheeldon getting this particular job - shows how much I know.

Jane, is he really going to work with the POB ? Next season perhaps ? That would be interesting news, as I've been curious about his style, and it seems like a safer bet for the POB than most of the choreographers they invite (lately, Benjamin Millepied, whose work was not very good IMO).

Well, the press release says 'His plans include a new work for Paris Opéra Ballet', but that's all I know!

From the press release Linked by Jane: Note the importance assigned to versatility. The Royal seems to be expanding its product line, not unlike POB over the past years and NYCB under Martins. Mashinka refers to deep discounts in ticket prices for Chroma. Perhaps ROB is considering variable pricing as well. (That WOULD be a good idea.)

All of this seems to be a reasonable strategy in business terms. My concern, already expressed by others, is that changes in education, teaching, and coaching may move the company -- intentionally or not -- towards a new approach to movement that undermines its ability to preserve (and even expand, in the sense of encouraging new work in a classical manner) its own classical style.

At the premier of 'Chroma' the audience was arguably not a typical RB audience.Top price seats
were approx 67US dollars as opposed to approx 160US dollars for Sleeping Beauty, so who is surprised?

Younger members of the audience welcomed McGregor's dance work, I did not as I thought it was completely
the wrong sort of direction for a classical ballet company to go in. Chroma was also in my opinion not a very good dance work when a new 'ballet' of quality was really was required.

On the same programme Christopher Wheldon's new work was a ballet and a choreographically successful one at that, spoilt only by the relentless second- rate music of Michael Nyman.

Truthfully for me, the evening was only saved by a rather good performance of Balanchine's 'The Four Temperaments.'

You are quite right Bart to raise the question of whether such works might undermine the RB's style and
after watching last night's performance of 'The Sleeping Beauty' I was considering if in such a short time it had already done that. Port de bras were sketchy and free, execution of steps by corps and soloists were weak and it was if the die had already been cast. An under par performance by Cojocaru and Bonelli did not help and only Marinella Nunez as the Lilac Fairy and Sarah Lamb as Princess Florine in my opinion should have gone home happy with their performances.

I want to thank leonid for posting (on today's Links) an article in wihch Monica Mason explains and defends the appointment. For those who haven't seen that Linkn, here's a quote:It's very clear that Mason considers McGregor's role part of a line of succession that runs from Ashton and MacMillen.

The complete article is here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2482593.html

I hope those quotes were taken out of context. Otherwise, I look forward to Mr. McGregor's new version of La Fille Mal Gardee.

Golly, this is a shock. I can certainly understand why the RB might want to have an ongoing relationship with an artist like McGregor, especially given his work with new technologies, but somehow the title resident choreographer makes it sound like a different kind of aesthetic shift.

Any idea what will happen with Random Dance -- is he still going to direct?

I was also at the premiere of Chroma and can’t say the audience looked that much different from any other night. From my seat in the amphi I could look down and see the usual scattering of empty seats in the stalls where (as usual) the corporate patrons simply hadn’t bothered to turn up. The ballet regulars appeared to be out in force as it was a first night, but the ROH actually has a very small regular ballet audience, probably no more than about 5% - 10% of the house.



Speaking as someone who could never be called a ‘younger member of the audience’ and whose ballet going pals are in the main as long in the tooth as I am, I can put my hand on my heart and say we all loved Chroma and until reading Leonid’s post I thought that the audience reaction had been 100 per cent positive. The critics (with one miserable exception) were close to ecstatic as it was a powerful work danced with commitment and obvious enjoyment by all the company members. As for it being ‘the wrong sort of direction for a classical ballet company to go in’, the RB has been dancing modern works of this kind for years now and at least McGregor engages with the company and presents the dancers in a positive way unlike those dreadful acquisitions from Forsythe a few years back.



Actually Leonid, sketchy port de bras and weak execution of steps has been an unfortunate feature of the Royal ballet’s performances for a number of years now and the slipshod dancing you witnessed is fairly standard with or without new ballets by Wayne McGregor.

Chroma was a terrific addition to the RB repertoire, but I have serious reservations about McGregor being resident choreographer, he is a choreographer of undeniable brilliance but one that I imagine does best with a group of dancers dedicated to his works – exactly what he has at present with his Random Dance company, in the long run I don’t think this appointment will benefit the RB, Random Dance or McGregor himself.

The issue may be: "La Fille Mal Gardee" mal gardee versus "La Fille Mal Gardee" bien gardee. Perhaps MacGregor would make people feel more confident if he addressed in specific terms this issue of how to protect, preserve, and even extend the classical tradition of the company, while at the same time fulfilling his other aesthetic goals.

As to the introduction of contemporary ballet: this is going to happen anyway. If MacGregor is good at is (as Mashinka and ami1436 suggest, though leonid disagrees, and Leigh finds his biggest success to be an "interesting novelty"), why not give him a shot? Or, rather, a platform -- that is, more than a one-at-a-time commission.

The balance of classical/contemporary can never please everyone, but it certainly seems do-able, if one considers the example of POB.

Whoa

You're not saying that POB is an example to follow for a good balance of classical/contemporary ballets, are you? Their classical repertory is held up only by the quality of their training - choreographically it can, to put it mildly, be discussed.

Although I'm not sure of McGregor's brilliance (I've seen Random Dance do "Polar Sequences" and it felt very, well . . . random.) I did think that Chroma was a good work, and good for the company. My biggest problem with McGregor's association with the RB at this point is the title. He's not a resident choreographer and never will be one, unless he intends to disband Random Dance and start studying ballet. There's no point in McGregor addressing how he intends to deal with the classical repertory or the preservation and production of same, because I assume he doesn't. Why not Permanent Guest Choreographer?

Good question about the future of MacGregor's involvement with/ commitment to his own contemporary company. Have any of the reports mentioned this this? A related question: just how exclusive a commitment is the role of company choreographer supposed to make to the ROB? Is this compatible with having other institutional connections such as directing another company?

I like Leigh's question about whether POB is My impressions are based entirely on videos, and on reports on Ballet Talk and by other writers. I would love to hear those more involved with the company to weigh in on this issue.

My own feeling is that -- given the dearth of good (living) choreographers working in the classical idiom, plus the need for great companies to continue to challenge dancers and audiences with new rep -- POB may be doing the best possible job. Certainly it seems the best from my limited vantage point.
An interesting distinction. I hope that it will be discussed -- and this thread seems to be a good location, since several sources have made the comparison (favorably or not) between the Royal's approach to "balance" and classical tradition and the POB's.

Okay, I apologise in advance if this is incoherent, especially next to everyone else's postings. I'm procrastinating, so the boards are a good place to be.....

I agree with Mashinka about the audience make-up for the Chroma triple bill. From both the amphi and stalls circle standing, one could see an audience full of what looked fairly 'typical' for the ROH....

And, for what its worth, the children and youth at the Coppelia matinee earlier in the year were just as vocal in their appreciation. In fact, I'd rather say that the adults at the Chroma bill were louder (!) (I found this most shocking and unusual for a British audience, but that is another story).

I agree with Leigh, in that I feel my main problem is with the title. What does a resident choreographer do? He's obviously not going to choreograph only for the RB, who knows how many works a year he is obligated to, and whether he will, or is meant to 'transform' the company or add another layer to its 'traditional style'.

I mean this as a serious question: what do we expect of a Resident Choreographer? What was Wheeldon's impact on NYCB? What are expectations for Possokhov (sp?) at SFB?

From the press release, it seems to me that Ms. Mason is looking at McGregor as not only a choreographer, but as someone who will be part of a larger strategy of presenting the company, and developing young *creativity*. Not dance technique, but hopefully fostering dance creation.

From the release:


There's a heavy emphasis on coaching young choreographers, and the Education Department. bart, in a post above, inferred that this is a change to how the RB trains. It is not - although I easily understand why one might think so. The Education Department at the ROH puts on 'insight events' and ecuational events about ballet and opera. What the 'major project' might be, who knows, but if it is about movement and exploration, and (as an adult dancer, I hope), about including people in the process (ENB's Education Department does a FABULOUS job of this), power to them.

I think the crux of the matter lies in some of the first posts here, and reiterated above by Leigh. What is the advantage of having McGregor as a 'Resident Choreographer' as opposed to 'Permanent Guest Choreographer' or so? I'd say, from the release, it's probably in the guidance of young choreographers in the company (coaching for whom has said to be lacking), this education project, and 'technology' (whatever that exactly refers to). I still don't think this is the making of a 'new' company.

I do have my fears, still, about a stylistic shift to what beck_hen (I believe) eloquently called 'gumby ballerinas'. This is not to say that hypermobility/extreme flexibility hasn't been used by others at the RB (Monotones, anyone?) But, I'd hate for it to become the constant norm.

Parenthetically, I'm glad that you liked the Royal in 4Ts, leonid, unfortunately I was banging my head against the railing watching it. They just don't get it at all. Everyone kept trying to act - Edward Watson was one of the worst offenders. It's Phlegmatic, not The Lesson. I'm starting to be convinced that American and English styles of ballet translate as well as Russian and English literature - the steps or words may make it through but the intent doesn't.

One other thing to stir into the mix - the person in the company who looks truly inspired in McGregor's work is Watson. He's also the weakest in both Ashton - I've seen weak performances of both Daphnis and Oberon where he just couldn't do the steps, or more importantly the port de bras - and less importantly Balanchine. On the opposing side, Lauren Cuthbertson and Ricardo Cervera, two fine dancers, don't have enough edge to do another McGregor piece, Qualia, justice - it needed its originators (Watson and Leanne Benjamin) and Watson's unorthodox lines. If McGregor's work become more than novelties, how to respect both the choreographer and the institution?

This thread has gotten very interesting. My initial response to the issue of his title (permanent guest v resident) was 'don't quibble, Sybil,' but you're absolutely right in pointing out that it's the intent that matters. Like the distinction that colleges make with assistant and associate professors, one relationship is like dating, and the other is marriage. A resident generally precludes other residents, while a guest can be one of several. So if the RB is thinking marriage with Wayne McG, what does that mean for them?

I haven't seen any of his work for the RB, just some things for his own company, but those seem very different in style and intent from my image of the RB. Pacific Northwest Ballet recently did a new work by Victor Quijada, a choreographer with a mixed background that includes a great deal of club and street dancing. The new piece was like an exploded view of breaking, where things have been slowed down, taken apart and set in place so that the audience can see them more clearly. It was a fascinating work, very well received by the audience, but as I was seeing it the second or third time I was asking myself how it fit in with the rest of the rep.

It's not that I think a company's rep needs to be homogenous (and this is certainly not the first modern-influenced work PNB has commissioned) but I do think that everything needs to work together in some fashion. There needs to be something about the work and the skills needed to dance it that relates or informs other aspects of the rep, or this is just a beautiful orphan. And it's that concern that I see reflected in this thread -- that no matter how interesting or well made or challenging McGregor's work with the company might be, that it doesn't really 'go together' (to recall the old Sesame Street song). Or will this prove to be an exciting collaboration for both sides, remembering some of the work that Tharp made during her resident time at ABT?

Sometimes a phrase or short paragraph really helps me to organize and understand my own inchoate thoughts and feelings about a topic. You have done this for me here, sandik. You've also helped push me off the fence. Thanks.

If I may add something as a Parisian who follows closely the POB : please do not use it as an example in how to balance classical/contemporary ballets. We here (I mean most of the ballet-goers I know) are starving for more classical ballet, and most of us wish Brigitte Lefèvre, the company director, would quit. She has been head of the company for 11 years now, and things have definitely not improved under her direction. Most of the recent creations have been dreadful (Millepied, Brown, and a bunch of other choreographers whose names I can't even remember). The injury rate is very high (currently three out of the five scheduled Swanilda in Coppélia are injured, and the run hasn't even started), and we're lucky if we get three "real" classics (I'm not including La Dame aux Camélias or the awful rereading of Coppélia by Patrice Bart) each season. That's not enough - take for instance the Etoile Marie-Agnès Gillot, who dances a full-length ballet once every season at best (Swan Lake last year and that's it), since her build does not allow her to dance Giselle or Aurora for instance. She's gorgeous in contemporary works, but this is not enough to maintain the highest level of classical dance.
I would actually be glad if Wayne McGregor was named Resident Choreographer in Paris, as at least, from what I've read, his works actually sound exciting for the audience
Sorry to sound depressing, but it is very frustrating to have a company of such high level wasting its talents on works which are not worth it.

I did actually say that it was a rather good performance of the 4Ts by the Royal Ballet. I was not comparing it too performances seen by NYCB many years ago.

Further publicity for Wayne McGregor was to be found in tonights London Evening STandard by Norman Lebrecht which can be read on his site at this link:
http://www.scena.org/columns/lebrechtindex.htm[/url]

I should warn you that Mr Lebrecht has his own brand of hyperbole that I suppose is fine
for those who worship at the shrine of minor celebrities. If the Wayne in the title of this article had been Wayne Eagling, I would have responded more enthusiastically to his musings.

Thanks, leonid. My favorite quote, from Monica Mason:



Well, that's reassuring.

Agreed, dirac! The article also mentioned that his contract is tied, timewise, to hers - that is, to end in 2010. The article also interestingly mentions that she 'might' hire someone else to work on narratives!

Thanks, Azulynn, for that correction. Those of us who observe from a great distance may be impressed by the bits and pieces we see. This is quite different from knowing anything about what we do NOT see. I should have kept that distinction in mind.

I haven't followed the company very closely in recent years, since I've moved from Paris to Lyon, but I fully agree with what you've written: under Ms Lefèvre's direction, the classical repertory has been shrinking, and I'd say especially the 20th century neoclassical repertory (e.g. Lifar's works were completely neglected, the Tudor repertory that Nureyev has brought has disappeared, the Ballets Russes works haven't been performed much...) and she definitely seems fare more interested in the modern dance premieres, even though most of such works were very short-lived.

When you look at the survival rate of new works in the ballet repertory of the 20th century, you have no need to recourse to a mathemetician to see that very few ballets become part of the accepted canon of important or great works.

When I hear of the need for new or modern works I cringe a little, because the important or great ballets
are are never old or new, they are by their quality and significance timeless.

It worries me also Estelle that there are still many ballets of the past Royal Ballet repertory that made the Royal Ballet what it is(or was) today, appear not to be considered for revival alongside new works. Which echoes your fears about POB.

The essence of any company is not just its style of dancing but the ballets that made the ethos and reputation of that company.

In Monica Mason's short tenure as Artistic Director of the Royal Ballet, there has been much to commend her decisions so I should really trust her management. However it should be remembered that the recent audience reception of McGregor's 'Chroma' is unlikely to be the same audience to support the backbone of the RB repertoire, the Petipa classics and the Ashton ballets.

Yes this is what I hoped might happen when I heard about it- I also thought this might be part of his role too: to find other new choreographers. I think everyone is focusing on what his artistic influence will be (naturally) but as I understand it his role will be also as a sort of 'director of new choreography' if you like... able to also find, mentor, manage other potential new choreographers for the company and no doubt due to his prolific and varied work history (in many areas not just choreography but producing etc around the world ) he will also be able to help connect budding choreographers with set and costume/ designers/composers etc. OK, perhaps I am just projecting my own wishes onto him but this is how I see it anyway.... we'll see!



Well yes.. but on the other hand, for all its exlcusivity, time and time again ballet is being shown to be totally accessable (in fact even totally seductive) to the non-ballet going public once they are pushed across that threshold and get to see for themselves what ballet is all about, as opposed to the cliches and myths which surround it. I figure Monican Mason might also realise that some of the audience who come for the first time just because of the buzz surrounding a trendy, modern, chique work like Chroma will actually go on to explore the rest of the rep because they simply get hooked on the dance. So many times I hear people say they got hooked on ballet 'by accident'.

Revised version, will be up at www.danceviewtimes.com Monday morning.

Breaking News!

The Royal Opera announced Friday that Sir Elton John will be named Resident Composer immediately, if not sooner. Spokesman Reginald Foggybrane broke the news, which stunned the opera world and caused other Rocker Knights to spit nails.

"When the Ballet appointed Wayne McGregor as Resident Choreographer, well, that was a real wake up call for us," Foggybrane explained. "We could not be left behind. We don't want to lose out on the youth movement that's desperate to see the lyric arts, if only they could relate to them.”

Why Sir Elton? "Well, Madonna isn't British you see, and we're not sure she actually composes her own songs. So the Board mulled it over for a bit and lots of names were bandied about, but when they remembered that beautiful Candle thingy that Sir Elton sang at Princess Diana's funeral, there was really no question that he was the right man," said Foggybrane.

Unlike McGregor, whose recent work for the Royal Ballet played to screaming audiences and rave reviews, Sir Elton has never created a work for the Opera. "Of course not," said Foggybrane. "Don’t be silly. He's not an opera composer." Quite. But he will be now? "Oh, he's very excited by this and is working on the form as we speak. He's already got melody down, of course," said Foggybrane.

“And anyway,” Foggybrane continued, “who says he has to create an 'opera'? Who's to say what 'opera' is? McGregor isn't going to do anything that looks like "Swan Lake" or "Symphonic Variations" now, is he? Of course not! They don't want that — God, nothing like THAT. They want something that no one could possibly confuse with ballet." And if Sir Elton doesn’t produce an opera, but some kind of Contemporary Song Thing? "Who cares?" said Foggybrane. "It's all a matter of what the audience and critics will buy, and we think this is something we can sell."

When it was pointed out that Sir Elton, 59, may be acclaimed in his genre, but is neither young nor especially cutting edge, Foggybrane was quick with an answer. “Baby steps, baby steps,” he said. “We’re really lagging behind the Ballet here. They’ve been stuck with all those great Heritage Works, but haven’t found anyone to make ballets on the same level for years. So they’ve had to look elsewhere and bring in people from outside and call what they make ‘ballet.'  Brilliant, isn't it? They’ve been doing non-classical works for some time now but it’s new territory for us. We can't just dive in and pull out some Punker. But Sir Elton is still a big name to young people, and at least some of our longtime subscribers will know him. We think of him as a bridge between the traditional and the contemporary worlds.” 

Foggybrane admitted that the Opera’s problem was a bit different than the Ballet’s. “Of course, we don't have that many Heritage Works to toss out, just tons of Italians with a few Germans and Frenchmen thrown in here and there, but we do need new works. After all, how many times can you see 'La Boheme'? Young people don't like it, they just can't relate to it — good Lord, who dies of TB nowadays? And the singers need new works created on them, made for their very own vocal chords. That's what it's all about, isn't it?” We wondered how the singers’ classically trained vocal chords were going to take to New Tunes, but decided to save that one for another day.

Foggybrane reminded us that Sir Elton’s appointment is well within the operatic tradition. "We must remember that we've been stuck in a stodgy period for awhile now. We need someone to shake things up a bit. Verdi was a real rebel in his day. So were Beethoven and Mozart, not to mention Puccini." Yes, they were rebels, but they were rebels within their art form, exploring new paths without bulldozing the forest, someone pointed out. Foggybrane became impatient: "That's old thinking. Opera is old news now. No one’s writing it, and young people don’t come to performances."

That seemed to be the impetus. Young people aren’t coming to performances. Young people aren’t coming to performances. But even if young people are enchanted with the appointment, someone asked, will they be coming in droves to hear Sir Elton’s work at £170 a ticket? Could that possibly be a reason why The Young aren’t first in line at the box office? “Our prices are perfectly reasonable, considering the expenses of opera,” Foggybrane sputtered. “It’s such an elaborate art form—grand designs, great music, the most respected conductors, superb singers with years and years of the finest training. That’s what our subscribers expect when they come to the Opera and they're willing to pay for it. You don’t do performances that sear the soul on the cheap!” Foggybrane said, and who could argue with that?

[Edited Sunday, December 10, 2006, 6:00 pm.]

Wonderfully funny. Having talken a lot of stick on my local website over "The Macgregorgate affair" I needed this. I shall let the locals not wise enough to visit this site to read Alexandra's so pertinent post.

I'll see you in hell for that one, Alexandra.

Brava!

Thanks, all. I'll be putting this up on DanceView Times this week (probably slightly altered) as a commentary, but thought I'd try it out here first to make sure people would understand it was satire!!!!!

You mean it isn't true?!?!? I've already sent him a congratulatory email. And one to Sir Reginald, care of the Royal Opera House, as well.

It might be, by Monday I have to say I checked the ROH site to make sure he wasn't already Resident Composer (honest I did) and then checked Sir Elton's biography to make sure he wasn't RC somewhere. It's only a matter of time. Although opera fans seem to understand the nature of their art form a lot better than ballet fans do, so maybe they're safe for a decade or two.

And here I thought it was December, but obviously it's August wherever Alexandra is!

A not-so-off-topic side note... lately the ROH has been sending out surveys (apparently randomly) about its programming, etc. I know others have received some about other bills, but I received one about this triple bill. There's room for comment, and loads of little circles to check - including how satisfied you were with casting, with the performance of the principals (!!!!), etc....

One of the questions was regarding how many performances one watches, how many have been new works, etc... Seemingly trying to guesstimate a relationship between those who liked/disliked the bill and new/regular viewers? I wonder if they'll publicise results... I'd guess not, but still....

That's wonderful Alexandra - (and I haven't heard my husband laugh so much for ages). I just hope you are not gifted with precognition! It's all too posible!

Thank you, Alymer. (And it's good to read you again!) I'm afraid you're right!

I've edited my post, substituting the slightly revised version I'll put up on www.danceviewtimes.com tomorrow morning.

ami, thanks for telling us about the audience survey. It's a good idea to know what your audience wants, though these days people often gear what they're offering to these surveys, rather than educating them.

They do it in politics too, at least over here. Some years ago, if people said, "We want to abolish public education because the schools are awful" or "the most important issue to us is repeal of all taxes," a candidate who cared passionately about education would use the results so that his speeches would address the issues -- explaining how public schools could be made better. Today, he'd be just as likely to change his slogan to: "Close the schools and cut the taxes!"

I'm alternating laughing and crying. More bravas!

I’m only a ballet and dance lover and I’m reading with much interested all your opinions as experts in this art. I even recognize that when I first read Alexandra’s post I thought it was true but then I realized she was sarcastic about the decision taken by Mrs. Monica Mason.

Please forgive me for my interference or even for my audacity in telling something here, but don’t you find anything positive about that? Because the current repertoire would be granted, isn’t it? And the new choreographer will bring new innovative works that can attract new audiences, don’t you think so?

Maybe I’m completely wrong and I beg you to be indulgent with me as I’m for sure not at all qualified but I thought it could be an interesting thing and a much pondered decision from a Dame that has so well managed this institution up to now

Not interference at all -- all comments welcome!

No, I don't find anything postive about it at all. The current repertory is not granted now. It's been dumped into something called Heritage Works which, just by its name, means Something We Have To Do, something that's in another room, as it were, not something we live and breathe every day. Oh, God. Must schedule 3 Heritage Works this season.

Secondly, why do they want a new audience that doesn't like ballet? It's a ballet company. There are plenty of companies performing contemporary dance. There are very few who can dance classical ballet. The idea that "classical ballet" is a "heritage style," a dead end, a closed road, and that all new work must be in a different language is one of the things that's killing ballet.

And thirdly and most importantly for the future of the company, as has been said above, the resident choreorapher becomes the company's way of dancing, their native language. And that will have every effect on what is danced and how it is danced.

Other than that, it's a great idea!

Dear Carolina M,

Almost everybody that contributes to this forum is like you a ballet and dance lover and
the beauty of ballet talk. is that everyone can contribute a view.

I cannot agree that Alexandra’s post was sarcastic, but I do believe it was satirical and given the seriousness of the discussion I think it is an apposite response.

Firstly the Royal Ballet is a classical ballet company that has performed new works in its history created by choreographers who had a history of working in or studying classical ballet. New ballets in the RB repertory in the past that would be considered to have been fairly ground breaking, were created by choreographers who knew how classical ballet dancer’s bodies worked and that their works would fit in the overall RB canon.

Wayne McGregor has no such background in classical ballet.

Modern dancers cannot in general, perform classical ballet at a level that would be acceptable in a Petipa ballet. Likewise I am never really convinced when classical ballet dancers appear in overtly modern dance works. Skills may be present in such cross-over performances and perhaps also personality, inspiration and star quality. I am however, generally left with the feeling that I have witnessed a 'stunt' to attract popular media coverage, rather than a wider dance audience, or an artistic theatrical experience.

Many 'great works' of the classical and neo-classical repertoire remain 'modern' because they speak as loudly to today's audience as they did to audiences in the past.

'Chroma', whatever you may think of this work (I thought it poor on several levels) was undoubtedly a stunt. The publicity and marketing confirm this and the announcement of Mr. McGregor's appointment as 'Resident Choreographer' two days after the works premiere, confirms this. The whole affair smacks of the current 'celebrity making event' that has infected the media in outrageous proportions and to which once respectable bodies are now ready to stoop.

'Chroma' was given at a subsidised performance (especially low prices were introduced) which mean that the standard repertory of the Royal Ballet, the Petipa classics, and the standard repertory of 19th century opera enabled this. I do not see such sibsidising practice as wrong, if it is truly necessary to introduce new works that will enhance the repertoire and it is the repertoire that is the important matter in this 'McGregorgate Affair'.

On the same bill as 'Chroma' was a new work by Christopher Wheeldon that was as entirely 'modern' as McGregor's but used the training and the skills of the company that suited the dance genre they belonged to. Balanchine’s 'The Four Temperaments' completed the bill and confirmed that there is no such thing as a 'modern' work meaning contemporaneous to the actual day, as Balanchine’s work is convincingly as modern as both McGregor's and Wheeldon's works might be called , yet was created 60 years ago.

The question is are new 'stunt' works equal to necessary works, that will expand the repertory of a classical ballet company and give audiences and dancers new challenges. I would say not at the expense of the plenty of appropriate works from the historic RB archive of ballets and elsewhere, that can make the real contribution to the repertoire that an inappropriate 'stunt' work cannot. The answer to my question therefore is no. That is of course if you believe in the ethos and value the history of the Royal Ballet.

I have sat through very many uneven full length works and failed works by Kenneth MacMillan that drove me to despair as the Royal Ballet lost its uniqueness of style established by the works of Ashton, DeValois, Cranko and indeed MacMillan who had earlier contributed so much. From the 1970's the RB went into a performing and aesthetic decline, during which time the Ashton repertoire and the 19th century ballets lost style and detail.

Of course the Royal Ballet has changed over the years as the Royal Ballet School, especially in recent years, has lost its way and no longer produces dancers of the calibre of Bussell and Cope that alone Sibley or Dowell. Without the import of some excellent dancers from other traditions, the Royal Ballet could not exist, but this has to some degree added to the gap in the performing tradition of the RB’s core repertoire which undoubtedly will improve as dancers frow further into roles.

These are matters which reflect upon the Board of the Royal Opera House who in the last 36 years have as far as the Royal Ballet are concerned made only one appropriate major appointment and that is Monica Mason as Artistic Director.

Unlike previous incumbents, Miss Mason is identified with and has shown that she identifies with, the defined ‘uniqueness’ that once separated the Royal Ballet from other classical ballet companies.

The alternative to appointing Wayne McGregor(by the ROH Board), is to recognize and begin to develop choreographic talent at the Royal Ballet School and give opportunities for public performances. To allow choreographic development for a wide range of RB dancers through opportunities such as the groups that Leslie Edwards once led. To also search out across the world for new choreographers that will enhance the RB repertoire in a way that sustains its difference in a classical ballet world where many companies are dancing identical repertoires.

I personally cannot see how Mr. McGregor can make the necessary sustainable contribution to the RB ballet, having seen his ‘populist’ work (with some members of the audience) at the Royal Opera House and Sadlers Wells and denounce his appointment as Resident Choreographer as wrong-headed and sending out the wrong message to the RB’s expensive seat core audience.

The Royal Ballet is required to improve its audience attendance, especially for 'triple bills'. Does 'Chroma' presage future 'stunt' works with their attending publicity and subsidies. Will critics hoping to achieve the vulgarity of 'celebrity' status by association, support such events. I hope not and I doubt it.

I am one who hopes -- naively, perhaps -- that it would be possible for these huge national ballet companies to encourage and perform both classical and contemporary work, each at the highest level. It may be okay for the Metropolitan Opera to stick largely to the traditional repertoire, because opera has such a vast and deep body of classical work to draw from. Classical ballet does is not so fortunate in its rep, which -- though extraordinarily beautiful -- is much smaller and more limited in scope.

The question that has to be addressed is how DO these vast companies present both classical and contemporary work while not adulterating or crippling the nature of the classical base. Even if you try to draw a line or create a barrier between the two types of ballet, such lines/barriers usually turn out to be very permeable.

Alexandra raises an excellent point:
I suppose that it is conceivable that this would be avoided. But given the extraordinary influence that the company choreographer position once had under Ashton and MacMillen in the past, it seems that the Royal is exceptionally vulnerable to a new kind of stylistic take-over today.

P.S. Leonid was posting at the same time I was, and I very much appreciate what he's written, which has answered one of my biggest questions. Especially:

My God Bart. You are a quick reader.

Without this sounding like a pile on, you'll find the general tenor of the site tends to be towards this opinion, CarolinaM. When Alexandra founded it, one of its purposes was to be a place that was against indiscriminate fusion of classical and modern dance.

Here's an analogy. If you add a teaspoon of soy sauce to a steak, you get steak with an interesting flavor. If you decide that's great and use them in equal measures, you get something inedible. In every mixture, you need to know what's the base and what is flavoring.

A teaspoon of McGregor is an interesting flavoring. Equal proportions McGregor and Ballet is not knowing what is what any longer.

It was very noticeable at the end of the Ashton centenary how much better the company was dancing. Cleaner, crisper, with far more attention to ports de bras, and generally a more lively approach. And not just in the Ashton ballets - it showed in everything they did. It would appear that the technical demands that Ashton made on his dancers - principals, soloists, corps de ballet - forced them all to raise their game a notch or two. I'm not sure what we can look forward to with Mr McGregor. Yet more extreme extensions, I suppose and probably more injuries.