The Prince And The Pauper, Peacock Theatre, London

Child's play

John Percival
Tuesday 20 May 2003 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

This election is still a dead heat, according to most polls. In a fight with such wafer-thin margins, we need reporters on the ground talking to the people Trump and Harris are courting. Your support allows us to keep sending journalists to the story.

The Independent is trusted by 27 million Americans from across the entire political spectrum every month. Unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock you out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. But quality journalism must still be paid for.

Help us keep bring these critical stories to light. Your support makes all the difference.

Twin brothers aged 15 and that 43-year-old star who looks like a Tatar warrior have provided most of the publicity for The Prince and the Pauper. The twins played the title parts: those more familiar with the story than I was will know that they needed to look alike so that they could plausibly be mistaken for each other after a decidedly implausible decision to swap clothes. But it was Irek Mukhamedov's presence (as choreographer, not performer) that ensured a much higher profile for this year's production by the London Children's Ballet than for its previous activities over the past decade, although they have been building up consistently to this point.

The advantage of the subject, adapted from Mark Twain's story about children in Tudor London, is that it provides a lot of roles and a lot of incidents; the disadvantage is that the dramatic development is limited and artificial, and the story is not easy to tell in dance. Credit, then, to Mukhamedov, to the composer Timothy Hammond, and to Lucille Briance, LCB's founder and director, who adapted the scenario, for making the outcome lively, never boring, sometimes amusing and occasionally touching.

Mukhamedov's potential as a big-scale choreographer will remain an open question until he is seen working with more experienced dancers, but, on this evidence and some earlier work, I'd say he deserves a break. He worked his cast hard (57 youngsters playing about 150 roles), gave them some demanding steps and invented dances that showed character rather than straight classicism. Even more impressive, with a cast almost all aged nine to 15 (just two lads in their later teens to play mature roles), everybody danced expressively, above all the seven little boys entrusted with the ballet's wittiest and most inventive number, bringing the supposed prince the clothes for his coronation.

That sequence, together with a dance mimicking laughter, provided the best of the music, too, but the score supported the action anyway, while Diego Pitarch's ingenious settings (neat placing with minimal material) and Kate Ford's clever quick-change costumes excellently helped the action along. I am not going to suggest that the ballet was a great artistic manifestation, but I have seen performances lately by professional troupes that were less entertaining.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in