‘Crucible’ reviews ‘Concert’ reviews Guillem in reviews Bussell in reviews Last year of RB reviews

Serenade opened the evening - it's hard to think of a more accessible piece of abstract Balanchine. Created in 1935 for students, it was the first work he choreographed for American dancers and is loosely based on lessons he gave them. But any rehearsal studio associations are long lost and what you have is the most smoothly flowing testament to the female dancer.

The costumes - amazingly uncredited - are long flowing dresses in the lightest of blue chiffon. They float and swirl with the most gorgeous fluidity, complementing the movement and music just perfectly. Such marvellous integration is rare and overall it brought out similar feelings of contentment to that engendered by Ashton's Symphonic Variations that we have all (in London) been enjoying so recently.

Darcey Bussell led things out, has the perfect body for such abstract works and moved just beautifully. The very best of Bussell I think. She was supported by Jonathan Cope and it made one think again what a shame it has been that these two dancers have not been able to work more together. If you love dance and you love women you really have to see this piece.

The Crucible by William Tuckett was getting its premiere on the night. It's based on the Arthur Miller play about the American witchcraft trials in the 17th century though in a note Tuckett says that he concentrates on the central relationships rather than trying to cover the complete story. I suppose it was a nod at simplification but having 17 named roles in the program (what did Balanchine say about Morthers-in-law in narrative works?!) and some totally OTT costume designs by Ralph Steadman one was left thrashing around trying to make some vague sense of what was going on on stage. Many of the costumes seem to come with built in head gear and bristle with crosses and other paraphernalia - rather like the episode in Black Adder when the exceedingly religious relatives visit. Recognising the dancers underneath was a hell of a challenge but gave some amusement I suppose.

Along with the majority of the audience I don't particularly know the story and the synopsis packs in so much detail it's rapidly forgotten. The result was that while perhaps a few got much of it the rest of us went into whatever we do when there is something unfathomable on stage. Shuffle, try and fathom it again, look for some interesting choreography, play spot the dancer, think about what other dance one has coming up and generally try to count down to the interval and a stiff drink.

Tuckett seems to be trying to spell out a story but the choreography is strange at best and seems disjointed, undancerly and rather cold - it comes over more as movement and motion to me. The pdd didn't really seem to show so much invention, but to be brutally frank I felt so unconnected with the piece it was hard to concentrate. And yet there were Irek Mukhamedov and Sarah Wildor on stage together with some of the Royal's best dramatic dancers.

I got to pondering why this piece was being put on the main stage at all. The new ROH has two other smaller performance spaces, everybody knew they were coming and everybody said won't it be great because we can try new ideas and grow choreographers without running the huge risks of putting them on in the main house. Well it's a great plan but where is the action?

I find it rather depressing that in a new millennium and in a new house the choreographers that RB are backing seem only to indulge or repeat themselves when given such big chances and fall into traps that have been known about since the year dot. Surely it's time to invest in other young choreographers as well and ones who are liable to create works more attuned to the public's imagination. The ones that immediately come to mind are (and in no particular order) Didy Veldman, Cathy Marston, Christopher Hampson and Christopher Wheeldon. None of these is particularly afraid of the new either - but they all seem to share an instinct about pleasing the audience. It's a shame Tuckett was not in disguise and able to sit in amongst the audience and observe first hand a throng of people ill-entertained, see the shaking of heads and listen to the choice words of regret as people shuffled off for the stiff drink.

Despite the depression I have not given up on Tuckett - he is trying to do new things (if too much and on the wrong stage) and he has produced some lovely 'straight' pieces. And I suppose that even David Bintley can get the telling of a story horribly wrong at times...

Thank goodness for The Concert by Jerome Robbins. I'm always amazed that somebody so connected with NYCB also did work for Hollywood and Broadway. Balanchine appreciated Broadway though and Ashton did more than a few commercial pieces for shows and reviews when he was learning his trade. Such contact only seems to have enriched all concerned and perhaps that is one key to bringing through new choreographers. Whatever, Robbins knows how to tickle the audience and I have not had such obvious fun since SFB brought over Mark Morris's Sandpaper Ballet last year.

It's set to Chopin and with piano on stage Philip Gammon strides purposefully and sternly out to prepare - a lovely piece of acting in its own right. What follows is a kaleidoscope of images - dummies, dancing girls, painfully shy boys, butterflies, rowing couples, murder and love. It's all quite mad and at the end Gammon chases the butterflies with a huge butterfly net - quite surreal I suppose. It was led out by Sylvie Guillem and Luke Heydon. Guillem looked incredible in her one piece (as always) but it was her sense of comedy and fun that percolated through and it was so nice to see her as more part of an ensemble piece where everybody mucked in.

One would not go to see The Concert for its dance particularly - there is precious little and indeed this is much more the movement and motion that I complained of earlier. But it's silly and irreverent and gave the audience such delight.

I've never seen The Concert before, but some others thought the humour was rather less subtle these days - it's a cry often heard when old pieces return. All I can say is that I really enjoyed what I saw and I was returned to happy bunnydom again. What a roller coaster of a night.