319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on May 30, 2022 5:38:18 GMT
Sorry if this has been addressed already, but have the old songs been re-recorded for this concert or is the music itself just a playback of the old recordings? If they’re new versions, what are the new versions/mixes like?
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on May 4, 2022 16:09:30 GMT
Did Elaine Paige not appear in the end? I wonder why? Maybe she was ill. She was subtly removed from the lineup in publicity materials and on the website a few weeks ago so it wasn’t a last minute change, although they never actually announced she was no longer involved. Do you know why?
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on May 4, 2022 15:54:20 GMT
Did Elaine Paige not appear in the end? I wonder why? Maybe she was ill.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Jul 6, 2021 19:44:32 GMT
I know! I first listened to a version with a female Narrator, and then later came across an album with Peter Reeves. It was honestly so much more enjoyable for me, though I'm not usually one to say "Give that role back to the men!". It definitely does sit more comfortably in a man’s range, but I think it’s actually much more exciting to hear it belted by a female. Plus the show needs an exciting and dynamic female lead vocal to counterbalance all of the male vocal sections.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Jun 29, 2021 16:47:01 GMT
Don’t know whether this has been discussed already, but I wonder how Linzi will sound in this after thirty years? I loved her in this. I doubt she’ll sing it the same way now, but I bet she’ll still be fab (even if in a lower key for many songs). Thoughts about her vocals this time around?
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Feb 12, 2021 17:44:50 GMT
Picking just two is very hard.
Patti or Elaine in Evita
Elaine Paige in Piaf.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Feb 11, 2021 17:44:40 GMT
I saw the item on BBC red button news this morning about clarification for asthma sufferers. Nice to have confirmation that I will be in Group 6. Not too much longer to wait now. Are all asthmatic people now in Group 6 again? I hope so. A friend of mine was told by someone at her surgery that she was no longer classed as vulnerable or eligible for a vaccination, as her asthma is well controlled. What are the rules regarding asthma now? It still seems slightly vague.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Feb 2, 2021 9:32:17 GMT
For those of us who are gay , coming out is an ongoing process. As above it never ends which is a shame as the world still largely sees everyone as straight. But at least it is slightly easier now than it used to be. It can still be difficult though, depending on who it is you are coming out to . It should not be underestimated what an issue it can still be for many. You are absolutely correct. It is a very big deal for many, as it was for me. Strangely, my coming out to my family happened not completely by choice, but by circumstances. However, those circumstances actually ended up doing me a favour and coming out to family members was actually ‘anticlimactic’ (if that doesn’t sound too strange!) I’m not actually ‘out’ at work, though I know people know. In my family, it was just accepted without any fuss. I was lucky, I suppose. The message, though, is that some things may not be as ‘bad’ as you think. I hid my sexuality from my family for years and, in my head, built my coming out to them as a terrible moment that I couldn’t possibly face. As it turned out, there was no drama and no negativity; it was, in fact, positively liberating. I realise it will not be like this for everybody, but I am not unique. Many people will be far more accepting than you may initially think.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Jan 27, 2021 9:37:13 GMT
Is this sung in a lower key than written? It has much less of a ‘higher falsetto feel’ than usual?
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Jan 14, 2021 11:35:45 GMT
I think, if anything, long-running shows will be the ones that thrive after all this. Prices will initially come down and all the people who meant to catch Wicked or The Lion King might finally head into the west end to see them. As for 'making way for something new', I have a feeling that it will be a while before we see the kind of churn of new shows we're used to seeing. I think it will be a good few years of revivals and cheaper productions from tours etc filling up west end theatres. I agree, especially with the last statement you made. I wonder whether tours would be more preferable to producers initially than just going into the West End? Will people outside of London feel confident to catch trains etc..to see a West End show when the theatres open - or would many people see it as more ‘doable’ to go to their local theatres first (where they may be able to drive locally)? Plus, for some West End shows, international tourists make up a fair percentage of the customers. Who knows what the state of international travel will be at the time of theatres re-opening? I just wonder whether the initial national market for theatre and demand for tickets will be slightly stronger at the local level for many people outside of the capital?
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Jan 10, 2021 10:51:20 GMT
What do people think about the video clips of the two women being fined (one arrested) in Bournemouth? I, personally, was shocked.
I also contrast this with the video footage of the Chorley football players in the dressing room? There is video evidence. Will they be arrested for their behaviour? I suspect not.
This is all so worrying.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Jan 3, 2021 18:00:35 GMT
Is there any logic to Johnson now? Does anyone even believe what comes out of his mouth anymore?
Boris has reconciled himself to the fact that much tougher restrictions will be applied in the coming weeks - and the country is reconciled to it too, according to his words. I don’t know why he doesn’t just say : “Let’s leave the situation as it is for now and, if the situation worsens and becomes out of control in the wilderness areas outside of London, then we can, perhaps, make a bit of a decision then. For the time being, it’s absolutely safe, everybody! Don’t panic - we’ll have delivered tens of millions of shots of vaccine by April - no, really, we will - but the shortage of vials and bungs that we knew about last September hasn’t been solved yet. I promise you, though, we’ll work out how to get that vaccine into non-existent bottles!”
I despair that our country is in the hands of an incompetent buffoon who, no doubt, spews lies without so much as a breath of conscience. So far, the vaccine rollout has been painfully slow. I hope that Johnson does, indeed, lose his own seat at the next election.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Jan 2, 2021 9:45:00 GMT
It's going to be an interesting day on Monday. Lots of teachers saying, quite rightly in my view, they'll boycott schools due to them being unsafe. It dies seem to be the only way the Governmeht will get the message. Add that to the desperate pleas of medical professionals that many hospitals are at breaking point, I predict new measures before long. I have not actually read about a boycott (and neither has my partner, who is a teacher), but I agree with you that it seems to be the only way that the Government will listen. I struggle to see any logic in Johnson’s claim that (and I quote), “Schools are safe! Very safe!” which he made just prior to school openings being delayed. The message being given is that the only way out of this situation is now by vaccination whilst maintaining previous rules of social distancing (now needing to be 2m again, according to scientists’ recommendations), mask wearing and enhanced hygiene measures. Yet, even with a more transmissible variant that is increasing in all age groups (including primary age children), the Government thinks it can still just ‘plough on as normal’ with schools, completely disapplying these rules. This has surely got to be negligent and, possibly, discriminatory (given that the variant is rising outside of London and is estimated to be responsible for 66% of cases in England (outside of London), compared to London’s estimated 75%). How can it be legal for the Government to force school-workers into a work environment that disapplies the rules across society at the moment, whilst having a diminishing NHS infrastructure in many areas outside of London? Is this equality? The specific area in which my partner’s school is situated has a transmission rate of 756 per 100,000. How can being in an enclosed space with 30 households, no PPE and no social distancing be safe? On top of this, Williamson has been firm that teachers will not be prioritised for vaccinations. I’m desperately worried about the constant denial regarding the risks in schools and have grave concerns about how the Government seems to be quite combative regarding the safety of school-workers.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 30, 2020 14:52:44 GMT
Edited : ‘Worth noting that the 70% is those who might catch COVID’ - sorry, please can you explain what exactly you mean by this? I’m probably being dense, but I’m not sure of the consequences of this statement. Thanks. That was an odd way of writing it, sorry. I mean what you probably already know, which is that it's assumed that 70% of those who are vaccinated will be fully immune and not able to catch COVID. The other 30% will still get some protection, so it's "effective" in protecting more than 70% of those vaccinated. It seemed to be 100% effective at protecting people in the trial from developing severe disease. I keep seeing idiots on the internet who think that they are onto something when they claim that the immune system is >99% effective against COVID. It's as if that's the figure for comparison against a vaccine. I was trying to distinguish between effective against contracting COVID versus effective at not dying from it. In this case, it seems acceptably effective against contracting it, and very effective at not dying from it, so it is definitely does better than the immune system alone. That makes sense to me now. Thank you for your reply.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 30, 2020 14:16:13 GMT
According to the technical briefing, it's around 70% three weeks after the first dose, and that doesn't drop off for at least 12 weeks, which is why they think it's OK to wait up to 12 weeks for the second dose if it means more people can get that initial protection. Worth noting that the 70% is those who might catch COVID. It seems that during the trials, no-one who had received the vaccine became seriously ill or required hospitalisation, so assuming that translates to a larger population, this approach would cut deaths and relieve pressure on the NHS more quickly than insisting on giving people the 2nd dose after three weeks. There seems to be a theory going around that a longer gap between the first dose and the booster increases the efficiency of the booster, but I don't think there is adequate data to say as much. It's also worth noting that many vaccines have efficacy levels below 70% but they are still worth having due to the herd immunity, or reducing severity of symptoms and the burden on the NHS. It's just right now we have a disease that is endemic in the community, so we're all thinking in terms of our individual risk should we become exposed to it. Whereas public health people think of population risk, and how likely it is that any one person could become exposed to it. If lots of people are 'partially' vaccinated, then the levels of the disease in the population is suppressed, which protects us all. Thank you for your response. I’ve just read a report detailing what you just said and I feel somewhat relieved. Like I said, I’m very much in favour of vaccinations and hope that the new protocol is effective. I still feel that the figure of 70% is dubious, as it is a combined outcome of different trials, but the annual flu vaccine is much lower than the 62% COVID figure quoted, so I’m hoping the vaccine will make the difference that the Government is banking on. Edited : ‘Worth noting that the 70% is those who might catch COVID’ - sorry, please can you explain what exactly you mean by this? I’m probably being dense, but I’m not sure of the consequences of this statement. Thanks.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 30, 2020 12:39:51 GMT
As Oxford/AZ is approved for next week, I do wonder how all this would have looked had the vaccines come just 4 weeks before this new peak, Christmas and the new school term. Johnson was pretty close to pulling this off, it might seem. As it is ... very messy still. But there is hope! Personally, I’m very much in favour of vaccinations and will have mine as soon as it becomes available to me. I do question, however, just how effective the Oxford vaccine will be. The plan is to give as many people as possible the first shot, then the next shot won’t come until around 3 months later. I can understand that this gives more people some degree of protection, but the big question is just what level of protection a person gets during the following three months from that one dose? Certainly, it appears that immunity is not at all strong until the 22nd day after the first dose. AstraZeneca are indicating that there is data to support this vaccination protocol, but that it can’t be released (yet?) because of confidentiality issues. Reports also say that the level of protection provided by one shot is ‘good enough for the emergency situation we find ourselves in.’ I find this worrying. I really feel that the data should be transparent to independent experts so that the public is kept in the picture. I’m not convinced by the efficacy of one shot, but feel that many people will believe they are ‘more immune’ than, perhaps, they really are and that we’re being slightly misled by statistics being bandied about. I hope that this method of two-dose vaccination works and is eventually borne out by the data. At the moment, it’s hard to see what it is being based upon, but I can easily imagine the Government presenting figures for ‘the number of people we’ve vaccinated’ when, in fact, they are only partially vaccinated. I pray that I am wrong and that one dose will protect people for the three months required.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 29, 2020 17:06:03 GMT
Surely as today's cases surpass 53,000 there will be some kind of announcement? Lockdown? Literally any immediate action at all from the Government? You would hope so, but I think we’ve become accustomed to decisions coming later than they should. We shall see...
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 29, 2020 10:57:21 GMT
Do we consider Teacher’s as expendable, not sure what the age profile of teachers is but there must be quite a few who are at risk.
Say the death rate is 0.5% (age profile assumption) with approximately 500,000 teachers in the U.K. having schools open could lead to the death of 500 teachers. Believe the risk of infection has increased in children with the current mutation and is why we need to be more careful now than in the summer. If we want to prioritise education then we need to prioritise the vaccination of teachers who are unable due to Government guidelines wear the appropriate PPE when interacting with the children which is my preferred option as children need to be in school but only if safe for the teachers.
Testing only removes the contagious but by definition those identified are infectious and therefore not a safety measure only a containment measure.
Unfortunately, being the cynic I am, I do think the Government perceives teachers as expendable. My partner said so to his Headteacher and he agreed. Yet the Headteacher now has to follow guidelines that do not join-up with other guidance and are vastly different to other places of work. Let’s face it : there’s no love lost between the Government and teachers. When you raise the question about teachers being perceived as expendable, I genuinely fear that the answer is ‘yes’. I honestly think the Government couldn’t give a toss about them and their families. The Government ministers should hang their heads in shame.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 29, 2020 10:06:07 GMT
Whenever I have seen the briefings, it has always been mentioned by the health people that education and children being in school is really important not only for their wellbeing but also their health and long term success. I am no education expert, but my partner who used to teach said he always noticed a difference even after the school holidays, so keeping them off indefinitely would not seem to be a good idea. Though in this situation anything can happen ( or was that Mary Poppins?!!) No one is talking about keeping them off indefinitely though, just for a couple of months to reduce the spread while the most vulnerable are vaccinated. After that, theoretically, the hospital admission levels should go down so the NHS should be able to cope. I really don't understand in that context why anyone could be so vehemently against a temporary closure as some opinions I've seen elsewhere. I agree. I can’t see how a temporary closure is a bad thing in the current situation. As a poster above said (apologies, but I can’t seem to see it now), what is the point of having tiers with quite severe restrictions (and a circulating variant that scientists believe is more transmissible between children) if large collections of households can interact with one another in schools? Current guidelines clearly state that children do not need to socially distance in schools (and, of course, they cannot physically do this, even in primary schools). Will this still be the case with the new variant? Sometimes, I am quite cynical, but I can well imagine the Government pulling every single string available to pursue and present the narrative that ‘children do not transmit the new variant as easily as adults’. They are desperate to keep schools open - not for the benefit of children, in my opinion, but to not appear as if they are u-turning again. There is no sense in opening schools at the moment. It goes against every piece of advice being issued by the Government. As stated in a previous post, this is a whole new level of incompetence.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 28, 2020 16:44:29 GMT
Everyone on here would agree that education is very important, but to a point. In WWII when the Luftwaffe were dropping bombs, children didn’t go to school, it was too dangerous, but allowances were made. The kid next door to me goes to a bog standard academy, they were all given a cheap tablet, the kids that didn’t have their own one. This risible Government saying they’re concerned for children’s education is just plain laughable, they are deliberately seeking a confrontation with the teaching unions, so it is all about ideology. Which is a shame as the teaching profession is one of the most hard working, considerate and caring careers. Well said! I fully agree!
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 28, 2020 14:58:58 GMT
Well I'm surprised given the specificity of Health and Safety legislation, and the union, and the danger of transmission to other employees. If the danger of transmission to other employees was something anyone with authority actually cared about, schools would have been closed since March and not reopened. I agree. Nobody cares about teachers’ safety. Even with this new variant - which is believed to be more transmissible between children/adults - schools will, no doubt, stay open. My partner is a vulnerable teacher. I think the treatment of teachers in his position is appalling. I really don’t think there’s anything he can do.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 28, 2020 14:54:27 GMT
Yes, according to the LEA where I live, extremely vulnerable and vulnerable teachers can be made to go to the workplace. There is a statement about ‘considering working in different roles’ or ‘carrying out the safest role on-site’, but it is not uncommon for vulnerable and extremely vulnerable teachers to be working exactly as they normally do (in my experience). Well I'm surprised given the specificity of Health and Safety legislation, and the union, and the danger of transmission to other employees. Maybe not enough people are challenging the LEA-agreed system. Teachers are not necessarily experts in the law.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 28, 2020 14:27:26 GMT
Vulnerable people are being forced to go to work? Yes, according to the LEA where I live, extremely vulnerable and vulnerable teachers can be made to go to the workplace. There is a statement about ‘considering working in different roles’ or ‘carrying out the safest role on-site’, but it is not uncommon for vulnerable and extremely vulnerable teachers to be working exactly as they normally do (in my experience).
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 28, 2020 13:50:05 GMT
I don't have a clue but I'd imagine every single week of education is crucial if the entire year isn't to be lost. The consequences of another year intake arriving in Sept without the oldest moving on must be almost incalculable.
And at the same time, each week more of the most vulnerable are being vaccinated. Each day, even. At some point you have to trust people to their own fate. As a vulnerable person you've got this far; hang on a few more days or weeks in isolation, it's around the corner. It's a very big ask, but of course they will do that for the grandchildren. Yes, but for some vulnerable teachers, it’s very difficult to ‘hang on for the vaccination’ if they are being forced to attend the workplace. Some of the vulnerable are ‘lucky’ (for want of a better word) because they can either work from home or voluntarily shield. Others are not so lucky and don’t have the choice. If this new variant is more transmissible between and amongst children and adults, vulnerable staff should be given some protection. That’s why I’m saying the Government should consider teachers (and pupils - if sufficient trialling has been done on children) a priority for vaccinations. Any period of remote learning could then be minimised.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 28, 2020 13:26:46 GMT
I think it is right for schools to close in order to save lives. Catching up on education is possible and I find it strange that the risk of keeping schools open is being considered when a new variant (that is likely to be more transmissible between children and, therefore, whole households) is circulating - especially when a vaccination is within sight.
The idea that this Government is at all interested in the education of all children, given that they have made the biggest cuts to the education system in recent years, is laughable. They talk of children being educated as a ‘moral duty’ whilst reducing school budgets to the lowest they have been in years. They don’t care about the disadvantaged being the ones to suffer the most. This is also proven by the shocking lack of progress there has been by the Government to enable remote learning for the most deprived children. They have done little since March that has made any credible difference.
I think the temporary closure of schools should be considered as a short-term measure. Maybe the Government should consider teachers (and pupils) a high priority for vaccinations? At the moment, schools are open, but for some, there is little stability. With remote learning as a short-term possibility and prioritising vaccinations, maybe schools could then return with more confidence?
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 28, 2020 10:19:06 GMT
I saw this at the Shaftesbury in 1990 and it was, indeed, a limited run. It was choreographed by Anthony van Laast and starred Marti Webb and Wayne Sleep. The understudy for Marti Webb was Carol Nielsson, although I’m not sure whether she actually performed.
Marti Webb was good in the role. Her voice was very powerful (if slightly shrill at times) and she could certainly belt to the rafters.
Wayne Sleep, as you would expect, danced superbly. The only other member of the dance troupe I can recall is Linda Mae-Brewer (Aeva May).
Unfortunately, I’m not sure the production sold that well. I went to a Saturday matinee. The upper level of the theatre was completely closed and both the stalls and the Royal Circle (where I sat) were at least one-third empty. I think my ticket for the front of the Royal Circle was £20.00
I went mainly to see Marti Webb and was concerned at the time that she wouldn’t perform matinees (as seemed to be the case quite often with leading ladies at the time). I needn’t have worried. She performed with sensitivity and power, and was clearly comfortable in the very ‘rangy’ role. Her performance of ‘The Last Man in my Life’ was wonderful.
Very happy memories.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 27, 2020 14:39:20 GMT
I agree, talkingheads. Even with a vaccination, I will be initially cautious. It will take time for any real confidence to return when I’m in more public, crowded places.
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 27, 2020 13:58:35 GMT
Sounds like the plan now is to vaccinate the 15 million most vulnerable by February, then lift the restrictions and it's back to the original strategy of letting it spread amongst the rest of us. I wonder what it means by ‘the 15 million most vulnerable’, as stated in the article? Where does the term ‘vulnerable’ now end? I ask because, even with some people being in more than one of the nine priority groups originally reported, the Government estimated that the nine groups consisted of 25 million people. That’s a huge difference to the 15 million now being quoted. Interesting, and perhaps unsurprising, that the wealthy are offering to pay large sums to jump the queue for the jab. At the moment, it is reported that injections at private clinics are not allowed. I wonder if this stance will be maintained as the vaccination process gets underway?
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Dec 20, 2020 15:54:10 GMT
This new variant does seem to be at the core of the increases and maybe its genetic mutation has made children more vulnerable as it has changed the viral load required for infection. This could be the reason that schools have now become the petri-dishes of infection as it can break through the usually strong and fast developing immune system in children. In Politics events happen quickly but this variant was first identified in September, the growth in infection rates has been known for week’s. The thing that annoys me is that in PMQ’s on Wed there was no way that Johnson was not briefed on the situation and still gave the false hope of a ‘normal’ Christmas just to win some Political points against the Grinch who wanted to stop Christmas, Starmer. A few headlines on the Thursday was more important to him than the health and well-being of the Country. Was this particular new variant identified in September? I’ve read a couple of times since September that new variants have been found, but not this particular one. You could well be right though. Interesting that Matt Hancock says that tier 4 restrictions may have to be in place until mass vaccine rollout. Does anyone think this may be paving the way for a ‘we need to vaccinate London and the South—East first’ policy, with the rest of the country having to wait? Hopefully not, but time will tell...
|
|
319 posts
|
Post by Scswp on Nov 24, 2020 15:18:20 GMT
Fab news - we're getting this in Dublin after the Barbican (and still with Megan). That’s great news! Where did you read it? Do you know if it’s going to any other cities with Mullally?
|
|