Time to open another thread. Earlier threads are at
Thread I (over 30 posts)
Thread II (nearly 50 posts)

we also have a subsidiary thread:
Some questions arising from Ross Stretton's departure

Thread full
This thread is now full and a new thread has been opened for at:
Thread 4
Further (good tempered)) contributions, thoughts and responses there please. many thanks

Ross Stretton resignation
Corps, what a scorcher!
Simon O'Hagan looks at the feuds and allegations surrounding the departure of Ross Stretton, artistic director of the Royal Ballet
London
by Simon O'Hagan
    "The success of any group artistic enterprise depends on the quality of the atmosphere that surrounds it. No good work comes out of a bad vibe. The one Mr Stretton created was evidently plumbing the depths. Now the Royal Ballet is hoping that the company's delicate equilibrium can be restored."
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/media/story.jsp?story=337600

Royal Ballet - Deborah Bull
Ballerina steps up as frontrunner to head Covent Garden
By Richard Brooks
    "Bull, 39, who retired last year citing “nerves” as one reason for stopping her main stage performances, is highly regarded by both the senior management and the board of Covent Garden. Since the start of this year she has been artistic director of the Royal Opera House’s two new studio theatres, the Clore and the Linbury."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-429824,00.html

Some questions were raised on the previous thread about the manner of Ross Stretton's appointment.

A headhunter, or, as in this case, a search and selection committee, has particular difficulty in researching the last job held by the succesful candidate. Confidentiality means that a present employer cannot be approached before an offer has been made. Research into Ross Stretton's background is likely to have majored on his record at ABT which, by all accounts, was excellent, but where, crucially, he was not artistic director. Michael Kaiser's direct personal experience of Stretton will have been highly relevant.

It is almost certain that the search committee will have had limited knowledge of his work in Australia beyond the broad "headlines". To have researched the record in any great detail would have risked a breach of confidentiality.

It may not be the time for a balanced scorecard on Ross Stretton, but it should be said in his favour that he had raised some of the right questions. The Royal Ballet needs new audiences, new work and a more diverse repertory. Despite last week's events, these issues have not gone away.

In today's Mail on Sunday, David Drew, the Royal Ballet's principal character artist, scathingly denounces Ross Stretton's record. He did so without clearance from the Royal Opera House and in defiance of company policy.

He accuses Stretton of being the most divisive figure in the company's history and of being completely out of his depth as artistic director. Of his opening production of Don Quixote, Drew says that it was "an insult to the Royal Ballet with designs that looked like a Fifties pantomime."

"He was on a huge ego trip", Drew continues. "In rehearsals he was really a glorified ballet master, not an artistic director. Like all autocrats, Stretton never trusted his staff to do their jobs. A lot of sensible and experienced people were ignored."

It was during the tour to Australia, he tells the Mail, that dancers decided to move against Stretton. By then they were thoroughly unhappy about what they perceived as favouritism in his casting decisions. What they heard about his previous record at the Australian Ballet made them even more determined to act. They were further angered at the programme for the Golden Jubilee Gala, which Drew describes as insulting. "It became a glorification of Ross Stretton, not the Queen, and did not reflect the historical creativity of the company." After this, according to Drew, the ROH board became concerned and events quickly gathered pace.

David Drew says there should be no haste in appointing a long-term successor, but that Monica Mason, who knows the company's ethos, should run the Royal Ballet until she retires in four years time.

Additional thoughts for those budding armchair ADs to debate: Given the other large works in the season, isn’t having three big Tchaikowski ballets in one season is rather ambitious? Should Sleeping Beauty be postponed until next season? Should it be substituted by a triple bill of say Gloria, and Song of the Earth and the work of an in-house choreographer, perhaps chosen from previous winners of the R.B.S. MacMillan prize? If New York City Ballet can pull in good houses week after week with rep. evenings, why should the Royal Ballet, with effective marketing, fear empty seats for a series of triple bills?

But right now, my heart goes out to the dancers and the in-house choreographic talent for having had to endure such uncertainty. At the moment, it's the time to give them space to sort things out amongst themselves and to allow any necessary internal reconciliations a chance to take place.

But Stretton's problems with the Oz Ballet were a matter of public record. So either the selection committee knew about them and ignored them, or they didn't do their research properly. They are damned either way it seems to me. Can we hope that these people are kept well away from the selection of Stretton's replacement?

Seems to me that in the cold light of day, ADs, dancers and choreographers, good or not so good, can all be hired and fired. You can't hire a new audience. I'm glad he's gone before too many of the audience got fed up and found other things to do with their time.

I shall continue reading avidly, and hope someone will post that juicy MoS article by David Drew.

David Drew's comments are fascinating because if anyone is interested in the company rather than an individual position it has to be Drew at his age.

Regarding Deborah MacMillan, I doubt she made whatever approach to the board she made without much heartache and soul-searching. The Royal has no right to perform MacMillan works and it is entirely in her discretion whether it continues to do so. Of course whether the approach was a threat or a decision, we don;t actually know. I also doubt whether the dancers made their decision lightly.

Two things astonish me most about this whole saga. The first is that if a new director/manager wants to alter an existing company/organisation, he or she is unlikely to succeed without the support of the people within that organisation. And the second is that even an artistic director has a manager, a boss, and it is catastrophic not to tackle whatever problems emerge before it reaches a public bloodbath. Did no-one at Covent Garden KNOW about the disquiet?

I think Bruce's earlier comment of a square peg in a round hole is the best description of this. How could a Round Hole choose a Square Peg? From my observations of the last 5 years in Copenhagen -- where one Square Peg was succeeded by another -- or, perhaps a Square was succeeded by a Triangle and then a Rhomboid -- I think opera house boards do not really understand that running a ballet company is different from running the drama or opera branch, where an artistic director chooses a repertory and hires people to stage/direct the productions. (I don't mean to imply that this is easy, just that it is less than half of a ballet AD's job.) In theater and opera, you don't have to worry about preserving the same blocking, intonation and accent of the original production, whatever that is. To drag in another analogy, an orchestra conductor doesn't have to teach each member of the orchestra his/her parts, note by note. A ballet company's AD does all of that -- and has to deal with the day to day concerns of very ambitious, very young people; the age factor is another difference between opera and ballet, in the ROH case.

I believe it was Brendan who quoted the Ismene Brown interview with Clement Crisp on ballet.co, where Crisp pointed out that former boards were more knowledgeable. I think that's the key.

Very true! And of course, the opera "company", in the case of Covent Garden, isn't really a company at all; it's a chorus and a set of hired vocal cords. And the artistic director doesn't even conduct everything!

Some reflective thoughts form Judith Mackrell...

Ross Stretton resignation
Dance of destruction
The hasty departure of the Royal Ballet's artistic director lays bare the tensions at the heart of the company
by Judith Mackrell
    "The range of vested interests at the Royal Ballet - inside the company and among its patrons, critics and fans - is daunting. Lady MacMillan, widow of choreographer Kenneth MacMillan, had attacked Stretton over his handling of her late husband's repertory. No single director could serve everybody's agenda, and the fact that Stretton was making a reasonable fist of balancing new and old, of mixing reverence with risk-taking, can be seen in the disparity of complaints made against him. While some critics thought Stretton's programme choices were desecrating the Royal's classical traditions, others thought he was not being bold enough. The arrogance that made him unpopular was in part the thick skin necessary to survive in the job."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,801361,00.html

But hurrah the news - and i'm relying on this board for the details so three cheers more - and really apreciate all the wisdom that posters have shared.

One point on consideration. How on earth did the interview process not scrutinise Stretton's modernising tendencies? Or if he was not candid about his agenda - why again was he not rumbled? What are they about????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Too far away to understand what Lady McM has said or not - but David Drew is to be applauded for his honesty. I don't think he is an AD but when I get home I'll be pushing a note through his door saying good on yer.

Trust and pray that Monica Mason gets all the support she needs to corner the managerial machinations.

And Bruce, sorry to say it - but why did Stretton need thre years' grace before we judge; the dancers clearly couldn't have carried on so.

To the future: I liked the alleged candidacy last time of Seymour and baldwin - which won't happen clearly.

Bruce Sansom does seem the most likely - but pity John Drummond is too old - maybe he could be a special advisor.

I don't believe I ever said anything about 3 years grace, thank you very much!

I said the time to judge was when the third year programme was announced. That would have been April, May next year roughly. At that time you know the reality of 2 seasons (well nearly) and can see the third.

In a programming sense AD's need time and nothing changes that. With regard to Ross Stretton a bunch of other and related issues have percolated steadily up and could not be ignored - or not ignored by everybody! What's happened is horrid, but it is sorted and I believe the right thing happened - based on what I've read and heard anyway. Few of course know the complete story. But we need a few weeks and months to properly reflect on all this.

The point is the same. Clearly the dancers couldn't have carried on that far - nor would the regular audience hold up too.

But on a different tack - what where the highlights of Stretton's time?