leonid posted these interesting remarks in the Links forum, so I thought I'd cut and paste. Comments?




Having two major company schools who it appears can produce male dancers of some quality but not female in any number as in the past. Instead of the Royal Ballet School pretending to have trained graduate dancers who were in fact formed abroad so they can go into the RB as RBS graduates, perhaps we will see more dancers from beyond the EEC entering the corps de ballet in a more direct manner. The last RB School performance this summer did not bode well for the future of English dancers joining the company in the near future. I have not seen the graduates from the English National Ballet School. Perhaps the RB should have some more talented dancers from American to join the ranks?

I don't understand this mentality. Here in the US we seem pride themselves on being able to attract the best from all over the world. The Brits do not seem to appreciate that they are able to do that with several their top notch vocational training schools that attract talent from all over the globe. But when it comes down to the contract there is tremendous pressure to only hire the British born. Then on the one hand they complain about not being able to hire enough British Talent and then lament the foreigners who go elsewhere and wonder why they weren't offered contracts after all the scholarship money spent on training them.
Maybe those British Trained foreigners went elsewhere because they were not asked to stay. Thanks to the RBS (and other British Vocational Ballet Schools) for contributing to the ranks of the worlds ballet companies by turning out so many employable dancers year after year.

Is this really new? If I'm not mistaken, Merle Park, who was head of the RB School as well as a great dancer, was born in what was then Rhodesia; and the head of the RB, Dame Monica was born in South Africa.

Even though the Empire is gone, the Commonwealth of Nations marches on. This factor has to weigh in somehow in the discussion.

You are not mistaken
A surprising number of well-known 'British' dancers were born in South Africa/Rhodesia

Didn't Royal Ballet accept students from the school into the Company if they were from Commonwealth countries, even when employment requirements were much stricter than today? (Lynn Seymour from Canada is another example.)

Lynn Seymour...another good example of the RB's tradition of talent spotting. It just occurred to me that Wayne Eagling was born in California.

You are right they did. But, all things changed when we joined the EEC and became subject to their laws and their legal judgements.

The law now allows non EU workers to fill jobs in the UK where there are particular shortages of skills. Before, special cases had to be made.

Mel Johnson stated, "Even though the Empire is gone, the Commonwealth of Nations marches on. This factor has to weigh in somehow in the discussion." Interestingly while EU members have an absolute right to work in the UK, Commonwealth citizens do not and are subject to a points based system quota.

Ballet companies are one of the areas of employment identified where a shortage of workers is seen and they can now employ I am assuming, dancers from any country in the world.

Among regular followers of the Royal and probably by many UK nationals, there is the understanding that the RB is more than the premier company, they are the 'national' company and having the accolade of Royal gives them this status. Once the status of “Royal” is given by a Royal Charter having first been recommended by her Majesty’s Privy Council, it changes a body from a collection of individuals into a single legal entity. Once incorporated by Royal Charter, amendments to the Charter and by-laws require government approva. The status is not open to any organisation only to those that offer the highest standards and represent the UK at its best.

It is therefore a disappointment to some, that currently of the 23 most senior dancers, only 3 are UK born.

I do not know if the legal nature of the contracts for all the RB senior dancers is the same, but in the past, the designation was something like,(1)permanent member contract(2) permanent guest contract.

For me who has been watching the RB for more than 40 years and who has seen dancers graduate from the Royal Ballet School and ascend to principal dancers, I am personally unhappy that the RB School no longer appears to fulfil its function as it did in the past.

As to foreign(such an ugly word) dancers I am more than happy to watch the dancers we have in the Royal Ballet as they have in some cases brought qualities missing for a long time.

The criticism I most widely hear is that the defining style of the Royal Ballet has been lost. If this is the case and I believe it to be true it is not the problem of the dancers making but education in the English style as Dame Ninette de Valois called it, not being either taught or desired by the management of the RB.

In Ashton’s works especially I count it my loss and it is a loss for everyone else as far as I can see.

Leonid, I have not seen the company other than on video for several years but I would say that the dancers at the school definitely have a distinct style that in my opinion is classic "Royal Ballet Style". In my opinion dancers are chosen based on their ability to attain the style or having been perhaps trained in a similar fashion or having a natural affinity for the "style". To me it is very apparent in the dancers at the upper school. The look is distinct and very very understated and appealing to look at. I love the look. When it is reflected in the corps it is not seen anywhere else. I really enjoy seeing a corps with a distinct style I think that is what makes a company great

Regarding the decline in the number of British dancers in the British national company: what are the main explanations have been offered for this? Have suggestions for reform been offered by anyone in a positioin of authority?

(I write as someone who recently watched, while channel-surfing, the rather wonderful scenes concerning Billly Elliot's audition for the School. )

Is this a matter of decline of interest on the part of potential students? Competition from other artistic forms? Decline of recruiting efforts, starting with the youngest students, around the country? A de-centralization of the British ballet establishment, and a corresponding increase in British-born dancers in Birmingham, etc.? Lack of funding? Lack of caring? Or the dread (and rather useless) explanation: "All of the above?"

Surely things could be done to correct this trend -- IF those in charge think it's worth correcting.

I think there are british born and british trained dancers in almost every company in the world. Royal Ballet School had 100% employment again in 2008. The world is a lot more open it seems that many more dancers are able to travel for their training then they did 20 years ago. Maybe the British born dancers are branching out. Maybe the Royal Ballet is too.

I think Memo has made an excellent point.

I've just had a quick look at the BRB web-site. At senior level one of the current eight principals is British-born alongside 10 out of 18 soloists and 19 out of 32 first artists and artists.

I personally don't mind a person's country of origin, or (to a lesser extent) their training background. What matters more to me is the loyalty they show their company. All the long-standing principals within BRB have devoted the bulk, if not all, of their careers to BRB and that matters more to me than an accident of birth.

The Guardian's Luke Jennings addressed this issue and the consequences in this September 18, 2008 article.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/theatreblo...ballet.training

No doubt. But the issue at hand is the quality of British training. If the Royal Ballet School graduate most likely to achieve principal status is a Prix de Lausanne winner who spent one or two years at the RBS, having received the bulk of his training elsewhere, what does this say about the quality of the RBS? Why are so few of those who trained at the RBS from their early years achieving the same results? The fact that a slim majority of RB principals have no connection to the RBS whatsoever, and that most of those who do spent a relatively short period of time there would seem to reflect badly on the training offered there.

If the Commonwealth presence in the Royal Ballet has been reduced, why has this happened? Has it simply become too expensive for young Australians, Canadians and others to study at the RBS, leading most of them to train at home instead? As far as I can remember, the last Canadian to be a principal at the Royal Ballet was Jaimie Tapper, who trained and began her career at home. Is Leanne Benjamin, now in her mid-40s, likely to be the last "colonial" to climb through the ranks to the top?

I first saw the Royal Ballet live in 1981 in New York. The programs from that tour list 23 principals, including character artists, the vast majority of whom were born in England, plus 5 "colonials" and one "foreigner." Looking through the roster, filled with English and Celtic surnames, the only conspicuous foreigner, besides Gerd Larsen (and Genesia Rosato, who is, of course, a native of England), is Alessandra Ferri. I don't need to tell you that the Royal Ballet I saw in 2008 looked very different.

I found the article very interesting. I disagree that Gailene Stock has not done her job. (but I am a big fan of hers so I am definitely bias) I think that she has an uncanny eye for talent. She is not partial in anyway she calls it like she sees it and she also is a great judge of temperament as well as talent and she has an ability at the school to usher these young teenagers with discipline and compassion in the direction of their professional careers. I think having 60 teenagers from all over the world (and may I say predominantly brits) in one place keeping them in check and focused is a huge responsibility and the way they handle it with a positive teaching technique rather than compliance by humiliation is to be admired. I will say however there are two things to consider. Huge talent, I mean principal quality talent is hard to come by and very very rare and if the Royal ballet has the resources to go all over the globe to find it, or has the draw to bring that kind of talent to them then that is to their benefit. In any company they are from all over the world because that kind of dancer is hard to come by and reach that point at different times in their careers.

Also as the director of a ballet school in the US, and the child of a director of a ballet school outside of the US and having listened to Gailene Stock speak in public about this on several occaisions, societies view on the early training changes from country to country. Taking into consideration that you are starting with a young child with considerable natural talent, In an environment where the parents feel that a balanced life and maybe ballet 2 days a week you are not going to reach the destination in the same way as an environment where the child has access to ballet classes 6 days per week 3 hours a day. Training a dancer to the point where they may be ready to be accepted into a vocational school honestly takes going to the limit as far as the amount of classes and the time spent on this effort. Some people are just not willing or wanting or able to go to that extreme. And as someone who has been there as a professional dancer, a teacher and as a parent of a professional dancer it is ALL CONSUMING. Many parents begin to pull back with young talented dancers and become overwhelmed by the huge commitment that is required. From what I have heard there is just not the social support in the UK for that kind of intense commitment for children of a very young age. Where as in Russia or China parents may be more willing to put their children in a situation to be able to receive intense training without other outside interests or activities at quite young in order to improve their situation as adults. The thought process is just different.
I don't know if I am explaining this as well as I could. It is complicated. And trying to establish how and where the "talent" is coming from is really impossible to define let alone control.

I'm fairly certain that Lynn Seymour wrote in her memoir "Lynn" that Marcia Haydee, who was one of her classmates at the Royal Ballet School, could not be hired into the Company due to there were legal restrictions against hiring non-British and non-Commonwealth dancers (or residents). Clearly there were exceptions, but I don't think many at that time.

My question is do you think the company should go back to that?
Should the nationality of the dancer be taken into consideration when hiring?

I think the question is, why, since the Royal Ballet opened itself to "outsiders," are British dancers and British training having trouble holding their own in the new multinational pool? To put it crudely, why aren't British dancers and British training more competitive? Why are the Prix de Lausanne kids leapfrogging ahead of their British classmates? It's not about driving the foreigners out, it's about raising the standard of the natives.

Memo and volcanohunter raise different questions, but both are interesting and will, I hope, provoke responses.


I am ambivalent about this. I do understand, however, the artistic reasons for preserving a "national school" in the sense of a course of training, a technique, a distinct look or style, and a special repertoire.

I'd add another question: Does the survival of aa"national school" require that students be born and raised within that particular country?



Memo addresses a number of these issues in an earlier post. Similar questions have been raised about a number of jobs and professions here in the States, where foreign students and those from immigrant families seem to have greater rates of success than comparable students from native-born families. Maybe it has to do with the way people perceive the ratio between input (effort, cost) and output (benefits like earning potential, security, and prestige).

If you agree with the underlying assumption that the classics should be core rep, then the question is whether there needs to be a unified company style to do justice to the classics. If so, then the next question is whether a consistent style of training from a young age is needed in order to have a unified company style.

SAB, which dances neoclassical ballet, has been able to take dancers at the age of 13 and older, who supplant the students in the school who started at 8, in the upper ranks. Within 2-5 years of training, there is a home-grown corps. (I'll leave it up to the people who've watched NYCB regularly over the last decade to comment on the impact to the corps.)

Internationally, the major companies that adhere to this tradition of training students from an early age and creating a corps out of these dancers are Mariinsky, Bolshoi, POB, and RDB, although the Mariinsky feeds into many companies, just as SAB feeds many US companies. The Royal Ballet used to, and from reading a number of essays and interviews, many of the earlier generations of dancers from Commonwealth countries who joined the Royal Ballet mentioned the RAD syllabus.

If the goal is to create a corps trained in "international style", which seems to be a combination of many styles more than a defined style, then it makes sense for the Royal Ballet to take all of those Prix de Lausanne winners instead of RBS-trained British dancers, PdL winners are top dancers from a much bigger population, much larger than the population of Great Britain, just as SAB takes students from all over in its pre-professional ranks.

The Russian companies offered a huge economic incentive during Tsarist, Soviet, and now Russian Federation times to be one of the chosen to be trained, and they had a huge population of willing people to which to offer a chance. In addition, during Soviet times, having made an enormous investment in cultural programming on TV, so that culture was more widely spread and recognized. They and POB have come closest to maintaining a corps that, whatever the complaints, is at least trained consistently.

I'm always struck by Melissa Hayden's statement that you become a Balanchine dancer by dancing Balanchine's ballets, and Balanchine's statement to Kistler that now that she'd joined the company, he would teach her to dance. Dancing and rehearsing the ballets taught the dancers as much as the classroom, and it was a reinforcing feedback loop. Looking at the Royal Ballet rep, with so little Ashton, it's hard to imagine how the dancers can have the style reinforced enough to apply it to performances of Ashton ballets and the classics.

Also, does a company hire all corps members to be potential soloists, or to be career corps, with occasional solos and some growing out of the ranks? A company as large as the Mariinsky, especially with all of the touring, has enough corps members to take in bumper crops that are likely to grow through the ranks, while have a core of career corps, although from recent posts here, it sounds like they have gotten rid of many of the older corps dancers from the roster.

Birmingham Royal Ballet has forged close links in recent years with Elmhurst; indeed Elmhurst moved to Birmingham a few years ago. Desmond Kelly, who recently retired from BRB (he was the Assistant Artistic Director), is now Director at Elmhurst. The company already has several Elmhurst graduates - most notably for me Laura-Jane Gibson, James Barton and Nathanael Skelton.

With an interesting coincidence of timing, I noticed an bulletin on the BRB web-site today announcing that Elmhurst is holding open auditions in China while BRB is on tour there.

Here's the link: http://www.brb.org.uk/4994.html

I would like to see the percentage of dancers who are in NYCB have been fully trained say since age 11 by SAB. SAB very rarely takes dancers into the company without them dancing in the school first but how long they dance at the school is sometimes a formality and for maybe a semester for a year. However if you refuse the schools training the chance of you auditioning for the company is slim to none.



thats true and although the school trains up to Advanced 1 this is not a factor as to who they take although I do not think it ever was, it just happened that more dancers were trained that way.



I do not think this is correct. I think there was something new last year where 2 dancers from the Prix de Lausanne were offered apprentice slots, one of which was taken up I believe. However the Prix de Lausanne is more focused towards giving students scholarships and many have been given by the RBS to talented students as well as the RBS having a consistently good showing of winners at the Prix of students they were currently training. I do not think you could say that the RB corps is being drawn from the Prix de Lausanne. (please someone correct me if I am wrong).



I think the company would keep that information to themselves. I think they hire the best dancers they can find and think some will rise through the ranks and some fit well in the corps but then only time and individual dancer can really determine what happens from there. I also think all companies are different. Some really keep the corps very busy and many get to step up into soloist roles. Especially if there is new choreography going on and the choreographers are able to choose the dancers they want. That levels the playing field and gives everyone a chance at a role which I think is very healthy and keeps dancers motivated and "on their toes so to speak". My guess is the the more traditional companies have more of the status quo and more innovative directors might be more inclined to give new dancers more chances. However I do think that a cross section of hiring does happen when a director hires what he or she thinks as a solid corps member as well as dancers who are potential soloists. However I wonder if the factor of national origin comes into affect when hiring a dancer who a director really sees as having potential and being able to handle roles in the future or if they just want to hire the best dancer for the spot! I guess if they are a native of the country its a bonus but I don't think they will pass up a dancer they really love just because they are not a local. Put yourself in the directors shoes.........they must have pressure to do this as I am sure the Royal Ballet does, as there is a lot of discussion on this subject. But ultimately the audience then wants to see the best dancers, with a unified style, and the distinct presentation of that particular company, when they pay for that pricey ticket to the ballet do they not? What's a director to do?

Also as Helene mentioned about Melissa Haydens quote, if the coaching is not strong enough at the company level, the dancer is not going to continue to grow or develop an understanding of different choreographers. As they mature their knowledge and understanding increases and the coaching must continue to be very strong as the company level and not just in school in order for the dancer to continue to grow.

Can you give me an example of this?

To answer Memo's question, from what I can gather from the NYCB website it appears that approximately 13 of NYCB's 101 dancers either began their training at SAB or enrolled there before age 13, without attending the summer program. Ages are not always given on the site, but if a dancer started training at SAB in, say, 2003 and was made an apprentice in 2004, it is a pretty safe bet that s/he was not eleven years old at the time.

To answer your second point first.

Definitely no. If that had been the case in the 1940’s and early 1950’s, the Royal Ballet could have never achieved its international status as it depended upon the likes of Helpmann, Elvin, Grant, Larsen, Beriosova, Nerina, Jackson, Rassine, Rodrigues, Ashbridge, Rassine for its development and they were all born outside of the UK.

There are a number of questions to be dealt with in this topic and the first point to be made is, that some might say that the proper title of the Royal Ballet is the Royal Ballet of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland which is to say that its premier status makes it the national ballet of the UK and therefore a subject for national pride.

The Royal Ballet of Sweden and The Royal Danish ballet could be said to hold a similar national status to the Royal Ballet and a comparison with the number of non-nationals in these companies would be interesting. How many non-nationals are in the Paris Opera Ballet, the premier company of France or the Bolshoi Ballet and the Kirov Ballet the premier companies of Russia? How many non-nationals are in the National Ballet companies of Cuba, Canada, Hungary, Korea etc?

In the Guardian of 18 September 2008, Luke Jennings reported that, “Last week, the Royal Ballet told a committee advising the Home Office that very few British applicants "have the required level of artistic excellence or aesthetics" to dance with the company.” and later, “ The barest trickle of dancers has progressed from the school to the company over the last few years, and the lethal delicacy of that statement to the Home Office sends an unambiguous message about the state of relations between the two. He goes on to say, “

Let's deconstruct the Royal Ballet's statement. What they're actually saying is not only that most British-trained dancers aren't technically good enough to join the company, but that most of them are also the wrong shape.” and further that now, “those dancers going into the Royal Ballet company from the school, a high percentage have been students recruited overseas, polished for a few terms, and rebranded as RBS graduates.”


On the other hand, the Royal Ballet Schools website states, “ The aim of The Royal Ballet School is to produce dancers possessing a strong, clean classical technique with great emphasis on artistry, musicality, purity of line, co-ordination and a quality of movement that is free of mannerisms. The intent is to produce graduates who are capable of integrating effortlessly into The Royal Ballet, Birmingham Royal Ballet and other top professional dance companies.” What is meant by, “top professional dance companies” I am not sure, but as far as I can see, graduates are not going to the top half-dozen companies in the world.

What concerns me about dancers joining the Royal Ballet from a different background in schooling and identity, is that there is ample evidence that they have not been successfully coached to dance in that very national style, that made the Royal Ballet so successful and was of course so different from other ballet companies. The question arises, how long does it take to learn a different style of performing to the point when it becomes second nature so that every person on stage blends in one harmonious style.

What needs protecting, is the ‘English Style’ as propounded by Dame Ninette de Valois based upon the original RAD method and developed through the performance of classic productions of Petipa,Ivanov, the Diaghilev Ballet heritage and especially realised in the choreographic style of Sir Frederick Ashton.

It is my opinion that the Royal Ballet under the direction of Sir Kenneth MacMillan lost its way artistically and aesthetically, which Sir Anthony Dowell did endeavour to regain, but it was too late. The baleful influence of MacMillan upon the Royal Ballet’s repertoire has undermined the artistic status of the company which can no longer perform various choreographers ballets with fidelity or subtlety and invariably lack any sense of the once much lauded “English Style.” This is not the fault of foreign dancers, but a loss of tradition in reprising the core repertoire that made the company great in its own style. The lack of a continuing tradition of performance means that today’s dancers have no models as examples to follow when old ballets are revived.

Can the ‘English Style’ be revived? Is it worth reviving?

Dame Monica Mason has pulled the company somewhere close to the right path, but I see no particular evidence of either the right climate or desire existing for the company to regain the “English Style” whilst there continues the revival of discredited works like “A Different Drummer” or “Isadora”, the appointment of Wayne McGregor and the constant revival of MacMillan full length ballets. But it can be revived now, but perhaps not, in ten years time.

Is the English style worth reviving, certainly. It was distinctive and what was wonderful about it, was although it grew out of seemingly English personality characteristics, it had universality, but remained distinct, that made it popular around the world. Its revival, it would bring back that individuality that the Royal Ballet once had and gained from such ballets as, Les Rendevous, Symphonic Variations, Pineapple Poll, Gloria, Scenes de Ballet, Two Pigeons, Solitaire, Wedding Bouquet, The Dream, Requiem, Enigma Variations, Rhapsody, Les Patineurs, Requiem, Danses Concertantes, Month in the Country, Rakes Progress, and Checkmate etc.

The Royal Ballet’s style was also developed through a certain authority inherited from their performances of “Swan Lake”, “Sleeping Beauty” and “Giselle” in an authenticity of Imperial Russian performing style, which had long been lost in Soviet Russia.

I agree with so much of your post, leonid. The only thing I would mention is that I don't think RBS's success can be measured by the number of students from the school who join the top six international companies, since the Mariinsky, Bolshoi, POB, and NYCB rarely take anyone who haven't been trained by their schools, and the same is pretty much true of RDB, although they seem to have opened up to more foreign-trained dancers lately. ABT doesn't have a school, but they are taking more dancers from their second company.

Doesn't ABT have the Jackie O. School now? Not that it can really be compared with RBS, &c., yet.

Although there's not complete consensus on this, a lot of critics feel that Balanchine's spirit was kept alive by the Children of Balanchine who transplanted across the US and started companies of their own or were critical in developing dancers who could dance his works.

Was there a similar migration of proponents of British style who feed into companies that maintain the style, even if RBS doesn't? Or if RBS is, but the Royal Ballet doesn't want dancers trained in this style, are there companies that take and nurture these dancers?

Or is the style all but lost today?

I was trained by 3 dancers mentioned above who danced with the Royal Ballet in the "hey day" so to speak. Rowena Jackson, Philip Chatfield, Brian and Dorothea Ashbridge throughout my career as a pre professional and professional dancer. (I was also privately coached by Rowena Jackson as a small child maybe 9 or 10 and remember those sessions very clearly still today) I feel that the style was very distinct and unique. I am attracted to the style and it reminds me of my training and I really enjoy the "look" of it. However dancers schooled in the Russian tradition or Balanchine work done really well, also fascinates and intrigues me. I saw Ashley Bouder dance a few years back at a gala and found her truly thrilling to watch. As these dancers have gone out into the world however has it been watered down or mixed with other styles to meet the demands of a more athletic finish needed for todays contemporary work? Are low legs are great lines given ANY VALUE in todays ballet market as a young dancer goes out and tries to find a position?
One of the big complaints and debates today about the ballet world is that it is so steeped in tradition that it does not keep up with times.
Has the real "Royal Ballet Style" gone or is it constantly evolving?
Also are one or two dancers joining the company a year because that is what is available? Is what contracts the director is allowed to offer? They can only offer what they have. If they are satisfied with their company and do not have need to fire anyone, they can only offer spots that have been vacated. They do not have an unlimited supply of contracts to hand out they are all on strict budgets.

I agree with leonid that a company's "style" can only be maintained if the company continues to perform, in depth, a repertoire for which that style is required.

The "children of Balanchine" companies dance a lot of Balanchine and rely on ballet masters, ballet mistresses, and coaches steeped in the Balanchine style. This doesn't require them to dance ONLY Balanchine. A company which works hard to maintain its distinctive style -- in its schools, company classes, and repertoire -- can still dance lots of other things, even on a regular basis.

If a company has been fortunate enough to inherit a distinct method, style, and look, it seems a shame to give it up or let it fall apart. I have the impression that this has happened in Britain in a haphazard fashion rather than by design. They added this, tried to do that, experimented with this AND that, and eventually lost contact with their base. To maintain something like the "English style" you have to be conscious of it and create policy (not just lip service) to protect it . That means teaching it to your aspiring young dancers and allowing them the chance to perform the relevant choreography on stage on a regular basis.

Whosoever creates a work of art establishes its style.

That means in ballet if the choreographer wants an arabesque to be at a 45 degree angle or a 90 degree angle it is established for all time. Every work of art has its own aesthetics which cannot be changed simply because it was created in an earlier era.

There is a mistaken idea among some people in ballet that it is acceptable for a 180 degree arabesque to be executed in a Petipa ballet. This is not the aesthetic that one of the greatest choreographers sought to be part of his expressive style and it was not sought in academic classical ballet training as such physical acts were for the gymnast in a music hall or the circus. It was not that academic classical ballet dancers could not be trained to achieve such physical acts it was not part of the respect for the aesthetic of the form.

The same respect should be shown for Ashton and for MacMillan’s earlier ballets.

It is the very traditional manner of the symbolic/allegorical story telling of academic classical ballets, that has made them the most popular dance theatrical genre for almost a century. These ballets do not have to; “keep up with the times.” as they are for all time and one imagines that as long as the vast majority of audiences want traditional ballets, they will be performed.

By the same token a company style should not be, “constantly evolving.” That is why ballets are notated and taught by former executants for the next generation of ballet dancers to ensure that the choreographers created intention is preserved. In classical ballet companies, new ballets expand a repertoire, but the old ballets are not thrown away and nor should their style of performance be changed because we have entered a new decade.

Because someone can perform four perfect pirouettes en pointe does not mean they should execute them in a ballet when the choreography and music calls for two.
To do otherwise is an expression of artistic nihilism. That is to say in terms of the art and aesthetics of academic classical ballet, four pirouettes serve no purpose or have an intrinsic value in terms of either the genre or the ballets created aesthetic. Such an act, would have certainly been seen as vulgar by most choreographers.

The Royal Ballet style was the product as stated earlier of de Valois and Ashton combined with the inherited academic classical ballet tradition of the Imperial St.Petersburg Ballet and many dancers from far flung countries found no difficult in assimilating the style. The tragedy today, is unlike in the past the RB School has not in the last decade produce any seriously outstanding student who has become a star performer who might rekindle the manner of Dame Margot Fonteyn, Dame Merle Park, Dame Antoinette Sibley, all examplars of the 'once' company style.

Ballets belong to choreographers not to companies or dancers and the admired ‘style’, belongs not just to a company, but also to the audience that regularly supports the company.

He grew up in California, but he was born in Montreal, so he would have qualified as a Commonwealth citizen under the old rules. Richard Cragun, on the other hand, was born in California, which, presumably, is why he didn't join the Royal Ballet upon graduating from the school.