Stecyk

At least now you've read the court decision, though I am puzzled by your earlier comments where you wrote with such force and conviction. I am surprised by your comment, "I think he shows he has far from 'a firm understanding of the reasonableness of reactive human behavior in the dynamics of a relationship.'" I can't help but wonder if you are qualified to judge a judge's reasonableness of understanding. And, then you conclude that paragraph by writing, "...which was predictable in any case." I have no clue what you meant by that, though it doesn't matter. While I could go through the court decision and pick point by point to state my position, we both know that would be a useless endeavor, for neither of us will convince the other. Instead, I urge others to read the court decision for themselves to reach their own conclusions. I will, however, write a few words. Like many, I thought it was "game over" for Ghomeshi when the story first broke and his public relations firm dropped him after more women came forward. Then, when I learned of his acquittal of all charges, my closed mind opened. Why and how did the court arrive at its decision? I read a few online articles and watched the CBC segment on the decision. Some of the comments made by the ex-cop in the CBC segment helped me to understand how the situation arose. He indicated that when a sexual assault victim comes forward to lodge a complaint, the police and the Crown trust that individual. They don't interrogate the individual nor do they go through the individual's hard drive, for that would only worsen the already dismal number victims coming forward. I agree with that position, because as a society we want justice to prevail and thus need victims to come forward. After the CBC broadcast, I read the court decision. One of the issues I have, however, is that complainants must under oath provide to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, not a selective version of the truth. In a similar vein, the judge showed his dislike of the possible collusion where approximately 5,000 messages were exchanged. As your summary comment, you wrote, "And if you still think that being identified in a court decision and deemed unreliable is of no consequence, and only he has suffered in any way, I don't know what to say in response." One complainant deliberately chose to reveal her identity at the very start of the "Ghomeshi Scandal," while the other two complainants are completely anonymous. I trust you read the court decision carefully, so I am perplexed as to how two anonymous complainants (indeed, it's against our laws to reveal their identities--see the preamble to the court decision) are identified. Our discussion, Helene, is unfortunate. As our discussions progressed, we each stated our positions with fervor. I suspect we each felt frustration with other's lack of understanding and empathy. And our discussion devolved from there. That's unfortunate because we agree on so much more than we disagree. So in an effort to repair some of the damage, please allow me to state where I believe we do agree. Earlier you wrote, "The asymmetry of gender and influence is also interesting." I am positive we both agree that your statement could be expanded to include race, skin color, and sexual orientation, among others. I suspect we both believe people's influence should rise with their character and their ability to contribute. If we had a more diverse group of people who influence our societies, I believe there would be more opportunities for everyone. Unfortunately we are not there yet. Without veering off into politics, one need only look at the current political environment to see how much room there is to grow. I get the impression from our discussion that sexual assault is a hot-button issue for you. Every reasonable person is against domestic and sexual violence regardless whether the victim is male or female. As we know, overwhelmingly most victims are female. A friend of mine is a retired Crown prosecutor. She indicated that if she were victimized, she would not go to the police because of the hell victims go through. Given her knowledge and prior position, that's a strong and unfortunate statement. While I don't know what the proper steps should be, obviously we have more work to do. I am positive we both believe in fairness, honesty, and justice. So with that, I hope we have reached some common points of understanding.

For those reading this thread, I urge you to read the court filing: Ontario Court of Justice - Between Her Majesty the Queen and Jian Ghomeshi (pdf). In case this link no longer works: Date: 2016.03.24 and the Court File No.: Toronto 4817 998 15-75006437. Exercise your own independent judgement to reach your own conclusions. I believe this judge provided a well-written explanation of his findings. He knew that this case is high profile and would be subject to much scrutiny.

Helene, you're cracking me up. I am surprised you didn't mention OJ Simpson--you have a good sense of humor. You're right, though, that the state felt it had a good case. It's too bad that it learned more facts at trial. Those should have been discovered prior to trial. Did you read the court's decision? Or, perhaps, watch the CBC discussion last evening? I found the broadcast balanced. They interviewed the women. And, they also interviewed a former cop now working for his own security agency. He discussed that it is often difficult to draw out all the information from the complainants in these types of cases. You have to take them at their word. As discovered by the defense, there was more to complete the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And that's what our system of justice relies upon, especially when the case boils down to "she said, he said."

Your first comment is comical, though somewhat unexpected. Please remember, I didn't indicate sympathy for either party. And, one must admit, some of their discussions and actions do raise questions and doubts. Still, it seems odd that one can level serious allegations without repercussions. That's the point I was driving at. Most are quick to rush to judgement. One just hopes that he or she is never on the receiving end. One should remember, too, that Ghomeshi was declared not guilty. He was not, however, declared innocent. There's a difference. Now, as to your second point, I am not sure what you are driving at. Is a broad societal remark, or is it confined to this court proceeding?

I agree with your comments. It's interesting, though, that the state's case fell alert on the credibility of the witnssses. The judge found that they lacked credibility. Yet, there are no direct repercussions. Put differently, the asymmetry in consequences is interesting.

From an employment perspective, did belonging to a union help or hurt Ghomeshi? Did the union play its proper role? From a societal perspective, I find this case interesting in that two of the three women kept their publication ban--that is, the media is not allowed to reveal their identities--yet Ghomeshi's career and reputation have been harmed, not to mention his finances in having to defend himself. Because this was a criminal case, the state--that is, Canada--prosecuted the action and picked up the tab. As I understand , there is still one more trial. Once again, Canadians will be focused on that outcome.

CBC News: Jian Ghomeshi found not guilty on choking and all sex assault charges. Jian Ghomeshi was discussed at length in this thread, especially on page 4. An interesting quote late in the article is as follows:

In general, I agree. If I were a dancer (I am too old and don't have the proper body build), I wouldn't appreciate being identified for poor performance in a public setting either. A private conversation alone would more than suffice. However, dancing is a public profession. So they should be aware that others, including the director, might make some public comments related to their performances. For the director, too, it is not so easy. If he is constantly making derogatory remarks about his dancers in public, the obvious question becomes: Is it the dancers or him? Regarding Millipied, I wonder if his remarks--though they might seem unduly harsh to some--will be a catalyst for positive change? Had he kept his mouth shut, would the "problems" last longer? Has he caused others to look at the POB through a more critical lens? In other words, will there be some good resulting from his comments? If I may analogize from Anna Karenina, all happy and content ballet companies are alike but each struggling ballet company is unhappy in its own way. Sometimes unorthodox measures are effective.

I am curious, though, if criticizing a dancer in public is so taboo. In hockey, for example, coaches often criticize their own players in public. Yes, I know, hockey is a sport while ballet is an art. I get that. However, people are people. Dancers are expected to perform at a certain level. If they fail, then they are open to criticism. Is the situation really that black and white? Directors never criticize their dancers in a public setting? A director should consider the dancer first. Some dancers might be determined to dance even better if they have singled out in a public setting for performing poorly. Others would wilt under the increased pressure. A director's main goal should be to create great performances, not sheltering or protecting his or her dancers from deserved criticisms.

Agreed, the temptation would have been enormous. Millepied, however, is no longer that young. He’s old enough to know that running any large institution is a daunting challenge. It goes far beyond creating new works of art. Instead, a substantial—perhaps even majority of his time—would be consumed by working on managerial stuff. Keeping key management personnel and government officials appraised and satisfied would be important and challenging tasks. Then, there’s fund raising and marketing and finance and human resources and on and on. Some thrive on the diversity of people, tasks, and challenges, while others absolutely detest working on things that don’t interest them. A person accepting this role has to ask himself, does he enjoy creating the grand vision or does he enjoy creating an important part of that grand vision? A strong preference for either choice is perfectly acceptable. This decision, obviously, applies to both genders. You mention that he should have called Wheeldon. Let’s hope that he did. The POB, too, should have ensured that they were confident that Millepied had internalized the challenges. I am assuming that he interviewed with all the key players before an offer was extended. Management is tricky and unpredictable. Sometimes those who we think will excel fall flat on their face. Other times, those who we think will never do well pleasantly surprise us. My knowledge of Millepied and POB is superficial at best. I am just reacting to media reports, which are often highly unreliable. Thus, I will follow the comments from those with a more in-depth understanding of the situation.

Agree with your comments, pherank. BBC: Benjamin Millepied: Paris Opera Ballet director steps down One has to wonder why he took the position if he wanted to concentrate fully on the creative side without the distraction of the administrative work.

Taking off when the going gets tough doesn't help one's credibility for other endeavors. Most ventures worth doing are tough. There were likely several significant communication issues. For example, did Millepied perform an adequate assessment or due diligence before accepting his new role? Did he and the rest of the management team agree in broad strokes regarding the planned changes over the next several years? In other words, did he get buy-in upfront? Once he began in his role, did he keep the management team informed of his progress toward his stated goals, and equally important, did he keep them well informed of his desired changes to the agreed upon desired goals? Large organizations are difficult almost by definition. Yet, exceptional leaders find ways and methods to make things work. They are able to convince others of their grand visions. That said, if it truly wasn't working out, then the sooner he is gone, the better.

From the New York Times article, Benjamin Millepied to Step Down From Paris Opera Ballet: I found these comments interesting in that there is some parallelism with Filin's actions from the Bolshoi. Both wanted to introduce more variety.

Wall Street Journal: American Ballet Theatre Names New Executive Director. (subscription required)

TheGuardian.com "'​If the Bolshoi is sick, it’s because Russia is too': the ballet company's backstage dramas" Follow the link for the complete article. (Apologies, this link was already covered in the links section.)

While waking up this morning, I listened to BBC HARDTalk with guest Sylvie Guillem. When I went searching on the BBC site, I got the impression that I was listening to a repeat from earlier this summer. Here's a link to the podcast: https://player.fm/series/hardtalk/ballet-dancer-sylvie-guillem And, here's a link to a YouTube that captured the interview: I hope I am not repeating content that is already on Ballet Alert. I did a quick search and didn't find reference to this interview from August 2015.

Thank you very much for that link. The article certainly colors my initial impression of Roman Abramov. And, I agree with volcanohunter that it might have been better to leave him out entirely of the film. Without knowing the background story, I had one impression. Now, after reading the article, I have a much different and worse impression. New York Times: Wild Applause, Secretly Choreographed Given that this interview took place after the Filin attack, I am surprised and disappointed by his choice of words. Another unfortunate comment. I have found, as a general rule, that those who have achieved considerable success in any field are usually surprisingly bright. That doesn't imply that I always agree with them. I find, however, that when speaking with them, they have given their chosen vocation or field of study a lot of thought. The dancers in the film, for example, came across as thoughtful and well spoken. I don't know how he could attend so many ballet performances when he holds the dancers in such low regard.

As an outsider of the dance world looking in, I found Bolshoi Babylon an interesting film. I found the precariousness of the dancers’ lives somewhat surprising. For example, one of dancers remarked that she did not have enough work and later had too much work. One can only imagine the stress that must bring to a single parent. I had expected that the dancers with the Bolshoi would have a certain level of “comfort” in an expectation of pay, with some variability. Yet, it seems that variability could be extreme. Without pinpointing specific comments, I found the directness of many of the comments interesting. I sensed the rivalry amongst different factions of dancers. Moreover, I sensed the unease the dancers had with management. I recall learning about Filin’s attack and feeling sad. This film brought back many of those sad feelings. Whatever I think about Filin, I cannot help but have great sympathy for his position. His life’s work has been thrown into question and he has been severely hurt, both emotionally and physically. He might even face an uncertain economic future, which only a few years ago would have seemed unimaginable. I feel great sadness for him. During the opening scenes, we learn that a fan named Roman had been to (nearly?) every performance for the past 32 years. He’s certainly a passionate patron of the Bolshoi. I found his passion interesting. I enjoyed the scenes with Boris Akimov, one of the ballet masters. He seemed to have a philosophical bent as well as a strong sense of humor. He, in particular, is one person that I would have loved to have a long discussion with. His sense of Bolshoi’s recent history, say last 40 – 50 years, would be interesting. And, his discussion about dancers would be fascinating, too. Which dancers exceeded initial expectations and why? Furthermore, he remarked something to the effect, “Even those without much talent have ambitions.” Obviously, that remark is relative. One can’t become part of the Bolshoi with being extremely talented. Yet, it made me wonder how long those who are less talented last at the Bolshoi? Do the vast majority of the 250 dancers last only a year, or two, or three? Although I commented that I would have loved to have a long discussion with Akimov, I would have loved to have talked to most of the participants in the film. I know I would find the dancers themselves endlessly fascinating. To rise to the professional level at the Bolshoi, there must be something special about each one of them. Urin, of course, would be an interesting person to meet. What were his thought processes from when he first arrived to where the company is now? Is he satisfied with his progress? What were his greatest challenges in creating change? And so on. Filin would be another must person to meet. My intuitive thoughts are that conversation would be complex. There are likely many hopes and dreams that remain unfulfilled coupled with regrets. Moreover, there was so much pain and drama. And last, there is the uncertainty about his future. In short, I found that this film crack opened the door into the Bolshoi world. As I learned more, I found I had even more questions. And, although I found this movie sad, I was left with more knowledge and hope that the situation has improved.

A New York Times online article Review: ‘Bolshoi Babylon,’ Russia’s Famed Ballet Troupe in a Scandal’s Glare was posted on Sunday, December 20, 2015. According to a note attached to the article, "A version of this review appears in print on December 21, 2015, on page C3 of the New York edition with the headline: A Documentary Looks at the Bolshoi in a Scandal’s Harsh Glare." A subscription might be required to read the online article.

New York Times (subscription might be required): The Rise and Rise of Misty Copeland. I believe the online version was available on December 19, 2015. A version of this article appears in print on December 20, 2015, on page ST12 of the New York edition with the headline: Misty Copeland Takes Flight.

Before creating this post, I searched for "Bolshoi Babylon" and found this thread. I hope I am not posting information that hasn't already been posted elsewhere. I read the following three articles on the New York Times (subscription might be required): ‘Bolshoi Babylon’ Explores a Secretive Ballet Troupe Maria Alexandrova on the Bolshoi: ‘We Still Don’t Know the Truth’ Anastasia Meskova on the Bolshoi: ‘I Was in the Middle’

Harvard Business Review Case Study: Should He Be Fired for That Facebook Post? (Subscription generally required, though I believe you're allowed a few free reads per month). There's an interesting case study about an employee who makes an inappropriate post on Facebook. The question becomes what to do about it. The answer hasn't been provided, though there are some excellent responses from readers in the comment section. Many of the readers who commented have high profile positions and have views worth considering. Anyway, I thought HBR Case Study might be of interest to those who find this topic interesting.

An Edmonton Journal article: Wedding Tales: Alberta Ballet dancers now partners onstage and off.

The virtual reality video with The Wall Street Journal's article Virtual Reality: Behind the Scenes With a Ballerina at Lincoln Center is very good. I was watching it with my iPad and iPhone. As I moved either device from side to side, the video moved side to side, as well. Similarly, moving a device up or down moved the scene up or down. A subscription might be required to view the video.

AG, the answer to our questions is that people are strange. Some don't think beyond their immediate wants and needs. Fortunately, small problems such as these can usually be addressed by the intervention of an usher.