![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on 12 dates. show |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"most important opera house"? Is this something that is obvious to Brits?? Without further explanation, it seems a bit POV.
Message for Amandam when she gets here. Check out the Royal Opera House and visit me at User talk:Matthew Stannard
Slight confusion here. The article called "Ballet" has a list of Companies, including "The Royal Ballet". It leads to this page, which is not a company, but a building. Just to set the record straight. "The Royal Ballet" is based at the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden (ie this page). Arguably "Birmingham City Ballet" is a better dance company, but their building is not as historically as important as the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden.
At the risk of starting a contentious thread, as far as I am aware, the building opened as The Theatre Royal, Covent Garden in 1732; and was a playhouse. It was granted the right to become the Royal Italian Opera House in 1847. The article as written has a serious PoV problem, in concentrating on opera and ballet aspects. There is a serious piece of theatre history within this building struggling to get out. Not least the William Charles Macready Shakespeare revival of the 19th c. For over a hundred years it was one of only two places in London where it was legal to perform dramatic works. Kbthompson 11:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for that, I'll take a look when I'm next awake, and see if there's anything useful I can add. I take the point that opera and ballet sources may not be as forthcoming on the theatre aspects. Kbthompson 23:54, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
I believe all 'patent theatres' were given the epithet Theatre Royal; hence Covent Garden and Drury Lane - in lazy parlance, and any combination thereof as 'formal' title; when provincial examples opened up, they got the same title. (Should actually date the establishment of the market, against the construction of the theatre). The two London theatres seem to have been quite close, with an interchangeable cast and management (of course, that might simply be because there were few other career opportunities). Both were quite major influences on Restoration theatre, and both played their part in the ShakieRevival - without them, we'd probably never have heard of him. Kbthompson 12:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
OK, some revision. Mainly to get the names in. Handel's association appears to begin as early as 1719, at Lincoln's Inn. First season 1735. 1734 ballet (as we understand it) performed. Later performances include the fame of Grimaldi in their entertainments. Need to do some more reading before proceeding further. Oh, and at some date it was named the Royal English Opera. Kbthompson 16:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
a charter to hold a fruit and vegetable market in 1670, so it would have been well established by the time of the Theatre Royal in 1732. Vivaverdi 19:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, in my reading, the convent garden was attached to St Peter's Westminster (i.e Westminster Abbey); it was passed to the Duke of Bedford, who 'developed' the area - hence, the 'Duke's Company'. The market buildings, we know, did not appear until well after the theatre (see image:entry to the theatre by Rich). The whole area, including Long Acre was market gardens for the monastry/convent, and continued supplying vegetables to the city until the time of the theatre. The image appears to show stalls around an open area. Kbthompson 00:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Could anyone please add how many people can be seated in the opera house, maybe some more technical data too like the measurements? and could someone maybe add some images from the inside? cheers... Gryffindor 11:16, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Have changed bit about Chris Smith as he did not agree the lottery funding. Also I have added an external link for the damning DCMS report. Piersmasterson 16:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I have transferred the content about the Royal Opera to the Royal Opera page to make it consistent with the Royal Ballet content and to focus this page more closely on the building and its history. Humansdorpie 09:30, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Vivaverdi 15:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I have removed these and propose that others do the same if they appear again.
Consensus please.
Vivaverdi 02:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
In re-revertng to your original article, you clearly have nothing to offer on this discussion page as to why you feel it should be included.
Not only is the paragraph filled with typos, no capital letters, etc., but it simply acts as a piece of (self?) promotion for the company/personnel who provide food service at the ROH.
I would be prepared to see this section remain, as long as it is toned down to a FACTUAL presentation of what food & beverage services are available. OPINION (unless supported by a food critic in a worthwhile publication) is not warranted in this or any other article.
Vivaverdi 14:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
It would be great if this article had more pictures . . . the two interior drawings are rather redundant, and you can't tell what the place actually looks like now, inside or out.-- Dmz5 03:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I agree there should more pictures, especially images of the current interior Rtcpenguin 05:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Is it possible to start a disambiguation page named "Royal Opera House", since the name may also refer to the Royal Opera House in Valletta, Malta. Perhaps you could let me know what you think is best. Thanks. Marcus1234 08:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Surely we don't need this. It adds nothing to understanding the history or function of the ROH...
ALSO: removing the specific sections devoted to pointing the way to the ROH's performance history after 1945 doesn't add to anything. In fact, they help separate out the history of the house itself from the performances given in it in modern times.
I hope that there can be a consensus here that these reverts should remain. Viva-Verdi 22:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Someone added a sentence which suggested that everyone sees the surtitles, which, when joined to the existing sentence (nowe modified by me), suggested that only some seats have the electronic libretto.
Is this correct? Viva-Verdi 17:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
The ROH is obviously a good opera house with a good opera company. However, saying that it is the “one of the foremost opera houses in the world”, even if such statement is sourced, doesn’t follow the standards of objectivity that should be found in an encyclopedia article. Also, it lacks sources. I question whether this edit have followed WP:NPOV. That is why I removed it. Cheers! -- Karljoos ( talk) 20:43, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
At least source such claims. -- Karljoos ( talk) 14:07, 13 January 2009 (UTC) Crooks always claim they are the best in the world: no point discussing the subject. If some grant artist takes a few thousand off your grannies pension and justifies it by saying he didn't ask first but - hey! - it's the best opera house in the world you can be pretty sure he's a vanity crook. But if you criticise it you are falling to his level. "I agree", the memorial-seeker would say; "give me your schools and hospitals as well". Veganline ( talk) 22:54, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
What building was that? I remember reading about it a few years ago. It was either in Paris or in London. I don't know if its still standing. When it was being renovated in the mid-1800s a body was discovered inside one of the walls. At that time it was already at least 200 years old. -- 208.65.188.23 ( talk) 05:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Recently the file File:Covent Garden Theatre by Henry Brookes.jpg (right) was uploaded and it appears to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think it would be a useful addition, please feel free to include it. Dcoetzee 01:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
This list was produced in discussions at Talk:Royal Opera, London but it was decided it should be here not there
almost- instinct 15:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
I know a Hungarian pensioner's opinion does not matter much. Anyway, I'll write it down. I'm looking for the Royal Opera House website on the Internet, and it's a surprise that there is a UK sign on their website, which I know about the Ukrainians www.roh.org.uk. Maybe they sold their Opera House to them? Margit51 talk 23:13, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Looking further up, at a time there were too few pictures, but what I see today looks more like too many, and many sandwiching the text. Am I the only one to think so? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:54, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on 12 dates. show |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"most important opera house"? Is this something that is obvious to Brits?? Without further explanation, it seems a bit POV.
Message for Amandam when she gets here. Check out the Royal Opera House and visit me at User talk:Matthew Stannard
Slight confusion here. The article called "Ballet" has a list of Companies, including "The Royal Ballet". It leads to this page, which is not a company, but a building. Just to set the record straight. "The Royal Ballet" is based at the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden (ie this page). Arguably "Birmingham City Ballet" is a better dance company, but their building is not as historically as important as the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden.
At the risk of starting a contentious thread, as far as I am aware, the building opened as The Theatre Royal, Covent Garden in 1732; and was a playhouse. It was granted the right to become the Royal Italian Opera House in 1847. The article as written has a serious PoV problem, in concentrating on opera and ballet aspects. There is a serious piece of theatre history within this building struggling to get out. Not least the William Charles Macready Shakespeare revival of the 19th c. For over a hundred years it was one of only two places in London where it was legal to perform dramatic works. Kbthompson 11:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for that, I'll take a look when I'm next awake, and see if there's anything useful I can add. I take the point that opera and ballet sources may not be as forthcoming on the theatre aspects. Kbthompson 23:54, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
I believe all 'patent theatres' were given the epithet Theatre Royal; hence Covent Garden and Drury Lane - in lazy parlance, and any combination thereof as 'formal' title; when provincial examples opened up, they got the same title. (Should actually date the establishment of the market, against the construction of the theatre). The two London theatres seem to have been quite close, with an interchangeable cast and management (of course, that might simply be because there were few other career opportunities). Both were quite major influences on Restoration theatre, and both played their part in the ShakieRevival - without them, we'd probably never have heard of him. Kbthompson 12:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
OK, some revision. Mainly to get the names in. Handel's association appears to begin as early as 1719, at Lincoln's Inn. First season 1735. 1734 ballet (as we understand it) performed. Later performances include the fame of Grimaldi in their entertainments. Need to do some more reading before proceeding further. Oh, and at some date it was named the Royal English Opera. Kbthompson 16:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
a charter to hold a fruit and vegetable market in 1670, so it would have been well established by the time of the Theatre Royal in 1732. Vivaverdi 19:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, in my reading, the convent garden was attached to St Peter's Westminster (i.e Westminster Abbey); it was passed to the Duke of Bedford, who 'developed' the area - hence, the 'Duke's Company'. The market buildings, we know, did not appear until well after the theatre (see image:entry to the theatre by Rich). The whole area, including Long Acre was market gardens for the monastry/convent, and continued supplying vegetables to the city until the time of the theatre. The image appears to show stalls around an open area. Kbthompson 00:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Could anyone please add how many people can be seated in the opera house, maybe some more technical data too like the measurements? and could someone maybe add some images from the inside? cheers... Gryffindor 11:16, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Have changed bit about Chris Smith as he did not agree the lottery funding. Also I have added an external link for the damning DCMS report. Piersmasterson 16:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I have transferred the content about the Royal Opera to the Royal Opera page to make it consistent with the Royal Ballet content and to focus this page more closely on the building and its history. Humansdorpie 09:30, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Vivaverdi 15:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I have removed these and propose that others do the same if they appear again.
Consensus please.
Vivaverdi 02:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
In re-revertng to your original article, you clearly have nothing to offer on this discussion page as to why you feel it should be included.
Not only is the paragraph filled with typos, no capital letters, etc., but it simply acts as a piece of (self?) promotion for the company/personnel who provide food service at the ROH.
I would be prepared to see this section remain, as long as it is toned down to a FACTUAL presentation of what food & beverage services are available. OPINION (unless supported by a food critic in a worthwhile publication) is not warranted in this or any other article.
Vivaverdi 14:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
It would be great if this article had more pictures . . . the two interior drawings are rather redundant, and you can't tell what the place actually looks like now, inside or out.-- Dmz5 03:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I agree there should more pictures, especially images of the current interior Rtcpenguin 05:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Is it possible to start a disambiguation page named "Royal Opera House", since the name may also refer to the Royal Opera House in Valletta, Malta. Perhaps you could let me know what you think is best. Thanks. Marcus1234 08:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Surely we don't need this. It adds nothing to understanding the history or function of the ROH...
ALSO: removing the specific sections devoted to pointing the way to the ROH's performance history after 1945 doesn't add to anything. In fact, they help separate out the history of the house itself from the performances given in it in modern times.
I hope that there can be a consensus here that these reverts should remain. Viva-Verdi 22:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Someone added a sentence which suggested that everyone sees the surtitles, which, when joined to the existing sentence (nowe modified by me), suggested that only some seats have the electronic libretto.
Is this correct? Viva-Verdi 17:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
The ROH is obviously a good opera house with a good opera company. However, saying that it is the “one of the foremost opera houses in the world”, even if such statement is sourced, doesn’t follow the standards of objectivity that should be found in an encyclopedia article. Also, it lacks sources. I question whether this edit have followed WP:NPOV. That is why I removed it. Cheers! -- Karljoos ( talk) 20:43, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
At least source such claims. -- Karljoos ( talk) 14:07, 13 January 2009 (UTC) Crooks always claim they are the best in the world: no point discussing the subject. If some grant artist takes a few thousand off your grannies pension and justifies it by saying he didn't ask first but - hey! - it's the best opera house in the world you can be pretty sure he's a vanity crook. But if you criticise it you are falling to his level. "I agree", the memorial-seeker would say; "give me your schools and hospitals as well". Veganline ( talk) 22:54, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
What building was that? I remember reading about it a few years ago. It was either in Paris or in London. I don't know if its still standing. When it was being renovated in the mid-1800s a body was discovered inside one of the walls. At that time it was already at least 200 years old. -- 208.65.188.23 ( talk) 05:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Recently the file File:Covent Garden Theatre by Henry Brookes.jpg (right) was uploaded and it appears to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think it would be a useful addition, please feel free to include it. Dcoetzee 01:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
This list was produced in discussions at Talk:Royal Opera, London but it was decided it should be here not there
almost- instinct 15:16, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
I know a Hungarian pensioner's opinion does not matter much. Anyway, I'll write it down. I'm looking for the Royal Opera House website on the Internet, and it's a surprise that there is a UK sign on their website, which I know about the Ukrainians www.roh.org.uk. Maybe they sold their Opera House to them? Margit51 talk 23:13, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Looking further up, at a time there were too few pictures, but what I see today looks more like too many, and many sandwiching the text. Am I the only one to think so? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:54, 18 September 2023 (UTC)