Why does the American version of the TV show 'So you think you can dance' get huge viewing figures while the Australian version 'failed' because relatively few viewers watched it? Is it because the Aussies actually danced, while the Americans seem at the moment to be concentrating on something which while it is often amusing and sometimes gymnastically interesting doesn't resemble anything I would call dancing? I suppose it's the old maxim about no-one ever failing because they address the lowest common denominator: the audience is presumably aged predominantly somewhere between 14 and 25, and to watch ballet would to them be rather like being forced to read a book. What they want is something which they can relate to street life, or at east t something they see about them . . . nothing wrong with that, but maybe the programme should be re-titled, something like 'So you think you can jig about a bit'? O.K., I'm being harsh - the auditions, which are being shown at the moment, clearly reveal some remarkable dancers - it's just that the show is so obviously being dumbed down. When it actually gets going, we may see a difference as the top fifteen or twenty have to interpret real choreograpohy. Let's hope so.