>>An interesting thing to debate is repertoire of companies.
>>An example - how about:>>
>>19th Century classics: 20%>>
>>Totally new works:15%>>
>>New works from elsewhere:15%>>
>>Restaged works: 20%>>
Given Bruce's headings, three questions arise:
1. Wot I want
2. Wot regular ballet-goers want
3. Wot's good for the profit and loss account.
All 3 have their place, so here are my suggestions:
1. ME, ME, ME
19th Century classics: 15%
Totally new works:15%
New works from elsewhere:20%
Restaged works: 30%
Here, we have a roughly 3-way split, between old and newer standards, restagings from the wealth of the back catalogue and work new to the company. I might even load the latter category more heavily. Restagings of 'Concerto', 'Las Hermanas and BRB's 'The Prospect Before Us' show the great work, which we see infrequently.
2. Regular Ballet-goers
Ballet.co folks will give their own views, but I suspect that what Bruce gave as an example above will not be far from the general view.
3. Max.Profit Programme
19th Century classics: 35%
Totally new works:10%
New works from elsewhere:10%
Restaged works: 10%
Option 3 begins to look like the current ENB programming, except that the first and last categories would be even higher and illustrates the risks of allowing profits to dominate totally. Thank goodness the 1930s innovators of British ballet did not take this path.
Given the widely acknowledged excellence of my taste, discernment and general savoire faire, clearly Option 1 - ME, ME, ME should prevail.