Jump to content


This site uses cookies. By using this site, you agree to accept cookies, unless you've opted out. (US government web page with instructions to opt out: http://www.usa.gov/optout-instructions.shtml)

Peter Martins successor


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#1 flipsy

flipsy

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts

Posted 05 January 2007 - 07:10 PM

Damian Woetzel says he'd be "very interested" in being Peter Martins' successor at NYCB. (NY Times, December 31.) Christopher Wheeldon says he's not, so he's starting his own smaller company. (NY Times, January 4). Peter Boal says nothing, but he's already had his own troupe, and now runs a major company. Helgi Tomasson runs the oldest ballet company in America. Nilas Martins has a pickup group that dances in Central Park. And then there's Suzanne Farrell.

(Of course, no one knows when the job will be open. But ... )

Question: who do you think should succeed Peter Martins, and why? This is not a poll, but a discussion, so please write about as many candidates as you want. The list above is just for starters.

#2 Haglund's

Haglund's

    Bronze Circle

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 320 posts

Posted 05 January 2007 - 08:54 PM

I really don’t know who the next AD should be, but I think that perhaps the structure of the position could be changed to a much less hands-on responsibility for maintenance and growth of the rep and more management of the big picture as defined by the institution's mission. As we move further from those who were the 1st hand beneficiaries of Balanchine’s teaching, it becomes all the more unlikely that we will be able to find that ONE person who will be able to do all things the way Balanchine did or Martins tried to do. It seems like the current AD is a bit over-stretched and has micromanagement tendencies which aren‘t necessarily healthy for the organization. It would be a good idea to discourage the future AD from indulging in choreography and make sure he stays out of the business side of the institution.

So here’s how I think it could possibly be organized:

General Artistic Director [These would be Equal] Exec Dir -- All bus & admin

Reporting to the General Artisitic Director:
Asst Artistic Director - Balanchine repertory --
Supervises dedicated ballet masters to ensure the standards
of excellence, artistic aesthetic and choreography are
maintained, and documents changes, enhancements, and
individual interpretations of the choreography by the artists.

Asst Artistic Director - Robbins repertory --
Supervises dedicated ballet masters to ensure the standards
of excellence, artistic aesthetic and choreography are
maintained, and documents changes, enhancements, and
individual interpretations of the choreography by the artists.

Asst Artistic Director -Contemporary Choreographic Acquisitions --
Responsible for exploring and examining contemporary choreographers’
offerings with an eye toward incorporating artistic product into the
repertory. Supervises dedicated ballet masters to ensure standards
of excellence, artistic aesthetic and choreography are maintained, and
documents changes, enhancements, and individual interpretations of
the choreography by the artists. Works with AAMD - CMA to match
selected commissioned scores with choreographers.

Asst Artistic & Music Director - Contemporary Music Acquisitions --
Provides all musical supervision. Explores contemporary composers’
works and has full responsibility for commissioning scores for future
use by choreographers selected with the AAD-CCA.

#3 Amy Reusch

Amy Reusch

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,795 posts

Posted 05 January 2007 - 09:49 PM

It seems an excellent idea... and isn't an organization as big as NYCB capable of it?

But what then would be the General Artistic Director's responsibility? Programming the season? Choosing & promoting the dancers? Would there be jostling between the assistant directors?

But it does seem like good management.... rather than choosing someone well qualified in one of those fields and thereby perforce neglecting the others

Would this General Artistic Director function rather like Roy Kaiser at the Pennsylvania Ballet? I don't believe he is choreographing or dedicated to upholding a particular choreographer's repertory.

But what about the acquisition of new works? I can understand wanting that director on equal footing with the other two, but it seems like this would be usurping the general artistic director.

#4 On Pointe

On Pointe

    New Member

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 01:55 PM

Whenever a dancer manages to snag an interview in the mainstream press, even if the dancer is a teenager right out of school, the interviewer always asks "What are you going to do when you can't dance anymore", or words to that effect. I've always felt that it was disrespectful to the performer. It takes so much hard work, and dedication, to succeed in the field. Dancers should be allowed to revel in their current success. Dance careers may be short compared to some others, but most dancers stay active as long or longer than others in artistic fields. I've yet to see an interview where a young singer or actor is asked what they are going to do when they get older. And no one asks CEOs of non-dance corporations what they are going to do with their time - and their millions - when they aren't selling widgets anymore.

I say all that to say this - the job of Artistic Director of the New York City Ballet is not open. Peter Martins has not, to my knowledge, given any indication that he is considering stepping down. If you disagree with his decisions, and everything he has done as head of the company, that should all be fair game for discussion. But in my opinion, it's rude and disrespectful to talk about what's going to happen when he's gone when he's still going to work everyday.

#5 zerbinetta

zerbinetta

    Silver Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 680 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 02:39 PM

And there's always the "be careful what you wish for" factor.

#6 richard53dog

richard53dog

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,401 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 02:59 PM

I say all that to say this - the job of Artistic Director of the New York City Ballet is not open. Peter Martins has not, to my knowledge, given any indication that he is considering stepping down.


But in my opinion, it's rude and disrespectful to talk about what's going to happen when he's gone when he's still going to work everyday.



True, there is no public indication of an upcomming change. No Want-Ad has been published.


But actually, in my own opinion, there's nothing rude about speculating about a possible change in the administration of the NYCB. It's a public institution but more to my point, Martins is a public figure and speculation of this nature goes with the territory. I guess where we disagree is that I don't see him as a figure with any kind of shield around him.

#7 leonid17

leonid17

    Platinum Circle

  • Foreign Correspondent
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,458 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 03:14 PM

I say all that to say this - the job of Artistic Director of the New York City Ballet is not open. Peter Martins has not, to my knowledge, given any indication that he is considering stepping down. If you disagree with his decisions, and everything he has done as head of the company, that should all be fair game for discussion. But in my opinion, it's rude and disrespectful to talk about what's going to happen when he's gone when he's still going to work everyday.


I have to agree that the topic has an element of undermining Mr. Martin's status and I can say I have no particular admiration for his Directorship as Mr. B was the AD when I last saw NYCB.

There has to be some civilised standard of behaviour in discussing in public, what is after all at the present it would appear, someones personal and private life decision.

Criticise his choreography and decision making in specific terms and I would be happy to read such comments.

#8 carbro

carbro

    Late Board Registrar

  • Rest in Peace
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,361 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 04:06 PM

[size=1]Moderator's note:[/size]
Since no one here seems seriously to be plotting a coup against Martins, I see nothing wrong with harmless speculation. I started following NYCB in the early '70s, and there was talk then of who'd take Balanchine's place and what would happen to the company.

I think in any situation, who succeeds whoever's in charge is grist for conversation, even in the most abstract sense. Will Prince Charles succeed Elizabeth, or should the the crown just skip to the next generation? The after-Castro speculation has been going on for at least 30 years. And of course International Widgets Inc.'s Board of Directors has a fluid list of candidates to be the next CEO.

#9 Leigh Witchel

Leigh Witchel

    Editorial Advisor

  • Editorial Advisor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,466 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 04:54 PM

Balanchine was much older when the transition happened and there was no clear bequeathal (or people have questioned it) but one thing Martins when he took over that no one is doing now is that there has been no apprenticeship for the real duties of the job. The job title is Ballet Master. For all of the MBA's and new companies, I'd like to see someone in there working with NYCB dancers, coaching them in roles, working on scheduling and casting, resetting the core repertory.

Or is that all to be left to assistants nowadays?

#10 leonid17

leonid17

    Platinum Circle

  • Foreign Correspondent
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,458 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 06:03 PM

[size=1]Moderator's note:[/size]
Since no one here seems seriously to be plotting a coup against Martins, I see nothing wrong with harmless speculation. I started following NYCB in the early '70s, and there was talk then of who'd take Balanchine's place and what would happen to the company.

I think in any situation, who succeeds whoever's in charge is grist for conversation, even in the most abstract sense. Will Prince Charles succeed Elizabeth, or should the the crown just skip to the next generation? The after-Castro speculation has been going on for at least 30 years. And of course International Widgets Inc.'s Board of Directors has a fluid list of candidates to be the next CEO.


How curious that your post should be headed "Moderator's note". It seems rather heavy handed
considering that no one has suggested a conspiracy when merely a question of good manners
was raised in two posts.

The examples you give is what in the UK would normally be headline questions in the 'tabloid' press or a piece of 'puff' in those lazy summer days when nothing news worthy is happening in politics.

Is Mr. Martin's succession such a reasonable question to be asked at all, given his comparative young age amongst ADs/BMs/? Anything else would certainly suggest at least a prod.

Yours in good humour.
Leonid

#11 Helene

Helene

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,470 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 06:25 PM

How curious that your post should be headed "Moderator's note". It seems rather heavy handed
considering that no one has suggested a conspiracy when merely a question of good manners
was raised in two posts.

The examples you give is what in the UK would normally be headline questions in the 'tabloid' press or a piece of 'puff' in those lazy summer days when nothing news worthy is happening in politics.

We have a wide range of topics on Ballet Talk, and, as a rule, people participate in the ones that appeal, and don't participate in the ones that don't. I think that is the gist of carbro's message.

I am interested in pursuing the line of thought that Haglund's has raised, which is, when the inevitable question of succession is critical, what should the administration of a large, major arts institution look like when no one who has worked with Balanchine or Robbins is still alive or in the running? Does it make sense to have a single Artistic Director, regardless of what that person is called, or should the work be distributed? And in the case of the treasure of Balanchine and Robbins repertory, what is the role of the institution to maintain it, and what is the best administrative structure to fulfill this role?

Peter Martins is almost 60. While that is not by any means ancient, it is an age not much younger than at which Balanchine was thinking of who would succeed him. (The early front-runner was said to have been d'Amboise.) If the structure of the organization will change, it is key to vet who is interested in such a change, and to train a number of people to be able to fulfill the roles, so that the institution is prepared.

One of the things I find fascinating about the Russian companies is the tradition of individual, personal coaching by former dancers. It is one way that artistry -- great, mediocre, bad -- was able to carry on, despite administration by bureaucrats who knew nothing of ballet and by artistic directors who were on a different side of the fence artistically. NYCB has always been a place where a single vision was the main one, and with the exception of a small group dedicated to Robbins, did not have many artistic factions. The question is whether this is possible not only without the founding genius running the Company, but also without someone who was mentored by the genius and for whom the genius choreographed.

#12 vipa

vipa

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,099 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 06:53 PM

I really don’t know who the next AD should be, but I think that perhaps the structure of the position could be changed to a much less hands-on responsibility for maintenance and growth of the rep and more management of the big picture as defined by the institution's mission. As we move further from those who were the 1st hand beneficiaries of Balanchine’s teaching, it becomes all the more unlikely that we will be able to find that ONE person who will be able to do all things the way Balanchine did or Martins tried to do. It seems like the current AD is a bit over-stretched and has micromanagement tendencies which aren‘t necessarily healthy for the organization. It would be a good idea to discourage the future AD from indulging in choreography and make sure he stays out of the business side of the institution.

So here’s how I think it could possibly be organized:

General Artistic Director [These would be Equal] Exec Dir -- All bus & admin

Reporting to the General Artisitic Director:
Asst Artistic Director - Balanchine repertory --
Supervises dedicated ballet masters to ensure the standards
of excellence, artistic aesthetic and choreography are
maintained, and documents changes, enhancements, and
individual interpretations of the choreography by the artists.

Asst Artistic Director - Robbins repertory --
Supervises dedicated ballet masters to ensure the standards
of excellence, artistic aesthetic and choreography are
maintained, and documents changes, enhancements, and
individual interpretations of the choreography by the artists.

Asst Artistic Director -Contemporary Choreographic Acquisitions --
Responsible for exploring and examining contemporary choreographers’
offerings with an eye toward incorporating artistic product into the
repertory. Supervises dedicated ballet masters to ensure standards
of excellence, artistic aesthetic and choreography are maintained, and
documents changes, enhancements, and individual interpretations of
the choreography by the artists. Works with AAMD - CMA to match
selected commissioned scores with choreographers.

Asst Artistic & Music Director - Contemporary Music Acquisitions --
Provides all musical supervision. Explores contemporary composers’
works and has full responsibility for commissioning scores for future
use by choreographers selected with the AAD-CCA.


I love this thinking. I have not been a fan of the Martin's regime but realize that he has been in a particularly difficult position, one of succeeding a genius who often made exciting casting choices.

I'd vote for Suzanne for the Balanchine rep.

#13 Amy Reusch

Amy Reusch

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,795 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 08:02 PM

Well to me, it's more of interest because of the situation of the institution rather than because of any person involved. I believe there are some other dance institutions facing the same transition problem... At NYCB, there's a serious repertory legacy for both Balanchine and Robbins. Even with Mr. Martin's successes, he hasn't been in the same position as Balanchine or Robbins. (No one was worrying whether Balanchine was maintaining his predecessor's legacy.) The company was never intended to become a museum, but no one wants to lose or dull the jewels in it's repertory. The question is, how can NYCB acquire and support a new choreographic genius to Balanchine's caliber and not worry about how well it's curating the older repertoire. It would be very rare to find one person with both skills highly developed. Mendelssohn was one of those rare types, reviving the music of Bach & Schubert as well as being a genius in his own right. (I can't think of others, but there must be at least one). I rather like the idea of having separate people for the two streams rather than trying to find one person who can look both backward and forward... I just have trouble with the model in terms of the assistant directors... a triumvirate instead? Wouldn't it just be in a state of constant rivalry, weak compared to the board?

[my apologies for the redundancy with the above posts... I was interrupted in the middle of composition and when I returned to hit the "post" button, I discovered others had already addressed the same issue]

#14 carbro

carbro

    Late Board Registrar

  • Rest in Peace
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,361 posts

Posted 06 January 2007 - 08:32 PM


[size=1]Moderator's note:[/size]
Since no one here seems seriously to be plotting a coup against Martins, I see nothing wrong with harmless speculation. I started following NYCB in the early '70s, and there was talk then of who'd take Balanchine's place and what would happen to the company.

I think in any situation, who succeeds whoever's in charge is grist for conversation, even in the most abstract sense. Will Prince Charles succeed Elizabeth, or should the the crown just skip to the next generation? The after-Castro speculation has been going on for at least 30 years. And of course International Widgets Inc.'s Board of Directors has a fluid list of candidates to be the next CEO.


How curious that your post should be headed "Moderator's note". It seems rather heavy handed considering that no one has suggested a conspiracy when merely a question of good manners was raised in two posts.

Point taken, and apologies to you and BT. The discussion was becoming a discussion of the discussion. I was trying to divert it back to the question at hand, but found myself falling into the same trap. The only way I could justify my post under the circumstances was a shameful pulling of rank. Very bad manners on my part.

Yours in good humour.

Thanks, leonid. I appreciate it. :dry:

#15 Farrell Fan

Farrell Fan

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,930 posts

Posted 07 January 2007 - 09:33 AM

George Balanchine's title at NYCB was simply "Ballet Master." Whoever, or whatever, succeeds Peter Martins, I sincerely hope that the title "Ballet Master in Chief," a bastard creation of the Martins era, will be permanently retired.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases (adblockers may block display):