Jump to content


2011-2012 Trouble


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 Brioche

Brioche

    Inactive Member

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 176 posts

Posted 11 December 2011 - 12:04 PM

Here we go again.

http://www.sfcv.org/...ballet-san-jose

#2 Jayne

Jayne

    Gold Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 864 posts

Posted 12 December 2011 - 01:04 PM

Nahat, the company’s artistic director, said that in October he was formally notified by the board of directors that it has ultimate authority in all artistic matters, including choosing dancers and designating their rankings, casting roles, and planning future productions. At present Nahat’s sole duty is rehearsing The Nutcracker, he said, and no other productions (to his knowledge) are currently in the works or in rehearsal. The dancers have not been told of the company’s plans either, and questions to the management from their union representative have not been answered.

Wow, board supervision of artistic matters is a recipe for failure. The founder of Fry's Electronics may be a gifted business owner, but I do not think he should supervise casting decisions, or has the ability to judge taste in the types of ballets to acquire for the company, or judge which dancers deserve promotions.

#3 Amy Reusch

Amy Reusch

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,687 posts

Posted 12 December 2011 - 08:40 PM

Why are Boards deciding to pull this lack of judgement? What makes them feel qualified in any way to decide artistic decisions? Artistic decisions should be made by committee? Has China been so successful with this artistic model that the US wants to follow it?

#4 Brioche

Brioche

    Inactive Member

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 176 posts

Posted 12 December 2011 - 10:34 PM

It looks as if Nahat has either given up or given in.

http://www.sfgate.co.../DDQS1MBG4M.DTL

#5 Amy Reusch

Amy Reusch

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,687 posts

Posted 23 December 2011 - 08:24 PM

Am I the only one who finds this suspicious : http://www.mercuryne...nt/ci_19605515.

BEGIN QUOTE
The "artistic and training partnership" will allow Ballet San Jose to implement ABT's renowned curriculum at its ballet school and will provide a range of other opportunities for Ballet San Jose dancers and staff, Executive Director Stephanie Ziesel said. She added that the agreement included everything from the possibility of staging ballets from ABT's deep repertoire, to getting advice and training from specialized coaches.

But the announcement stopped short of revealing which ballets will be performed in the coming year; that news will be delivered Jan. 3, Ziesel said. That's nearly five months after the company announced it would not stage any autumn performances for the first time in decades.
END QUOTE

... Suspicious because there has been no parallel announcement from ABT... Is this just repackaging for public relations consumption that they are considering affiliating with ABT's training program? At Hartford Ballet's partially-board-generated demise, it almost seemed there was a promulgated view of the company as a proving ground for local wealthy families' daughters... and no will to see ballet or the company as more than that... (The Board practically implied at the penultimate annual gala that the dancers were children as they announced they were presenting them with lollipops as a thank you present). Is this the same path Ballet San Jose is headed down?

Why is there no announcement on ABT's site?

#6 dirac

dirac

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,081 posts

Posted 25 December 2011 - 10:01 PM

Another article published today, which doesn't clear too much up. It still sounds as if Nahat is toast, but not immediately, evidently.


"Dennis and the board are talking right now about what his relationship will be with the company," San Jose Ballet spokesman Lee Kopp said Friday, when the ballet announced a new partnership with American Ballet Theatre that gives it access to ABT's rich repertoire, training curriculum and artistic advisers.

"Dennis has some decisions to make and so does the board. We are not hiring an artistic director."


Artistic decisions should be made by committee? Has China been so successful with this artistic model that the US wants to follow it?


Well, I'd not go that far. Very difficult to tell what's really going on although I expect that money is the issue at bottom. It usually is.

#7 Amy Reusch

Amy Reusch

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,687 posts

Posted 26 December 2011 - 12:32 PM

At least they are being more straight forward about the ABT relationship... I really didn't care for the shared repertoire spin... Seemed dishonest. They aren't planning on hiring an Artistic Director, and yet that doesn't make those tasks go away. Who will audition new dancers? Who will decide the season? Sounds like it's turning into a pre-professional venture rather than remaining a real company. Offer less and you get less... becomes a situation of dwindling returns until no one cares enough for the organization to continue to exist. That is one thing a good artistic director will always do... fight for for the survival of the company. If I were a professional dancer, I would surely hesitate to relocate to San Jose with the company direction so vague.

#8 Amy Reusch

Amy Reusch

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,687 posts

Posted 06 January 2012 - 05:14 PM

Another NY Times article: http://www.nytimes.c....html?ref=dance

"The organizations are not merging; Ms. Ziesel said that her ballet would not become a triple-A farm team for the American Ballet Theater but would have access to the bigger group’s “toolbox and Rolodex.”

What on earth does that mean? I can't imagine they mean the development director's roladex... And the artists and craftspeople most likely do not hide their involvement with ABT. What contact info could she mean? And what toolbox?? And no mention of the training program relationship. I find this situation to be stranger and stranger.

“I’ve never experienced anything like this, except at the movies,” said Nora Heiber, national dance representative for the American Guild of Musical Artists, which represents the company’s 34 dancers. “It’s a better script than ‘Black Swan.’ ”

#9 Jayne

Jayne

    Gold Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 864 posts

Posted 07 January 2012 - 10:03 PM

The union has filed grievances:

...[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=3]the union representing the dancers filed grievances accusing management of breaches of various contract provisions and bargaining procedures. One grievance alleged that the "Swan Lake" performances by noncompany dancer Carlos Acosta -- a star in the ballet world -- violated collective bargaining agreements. Ziesel, however, said there have been no violations. This matter will be part of a Jan. 18 arbitration hearing.[/size][/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=3]The union alerted the company to another grievance in a Dec. 23 letter, alleging "harassment" by Fry. In that letter, the union's national executive director stated that Fry is involved in a relationship with ballerina Alexsandra Meijer, creating a "widespread perception among unit employees that Mr. Fry is granting favorable treatment ... and thereby creating a hostile working environment for the other dancers."[/size][/font]



#10 ViolinConcerto

ViolinConcerto

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts

Posted 08 January 2012 - 08:37 AM

Pick the one that most represents your take on Boards making artistic decisions. Think about Miami City Ballet, and a host of other examples:

Posted Image
Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

#11 Amy Reusch

Amy Reusch

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,687 posts

Posted 08 January 2012 - 02:48 PM

I wonder what Acosta's fee was.... (Not that I'd object! It must have been nice for the dancers to meet him.) Also, strange that all this is happening in the midst of a budget surplus.

Your emoticons are more than eloquent here!

#12 Brioche

Brioche

    Inactive Member

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 176 posts

Posted 10 January 2012 - 12:36 PM

I don't get it..............

http://www.sfcv.org/...-big-next-steps

From the ‘simple lamenting between sisters’ has come a complexity of intrigue, sorrows, and contention



#13 ora

ora

    New Member

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 14 January 2012 - 05:43 AM

[font=comic sans ms, cursive]Mein Gosh, what a recipe for a troubled dish of limited appeal. This may flow from the small refence in a local mall type paper that was quoted to a friend as a humorous wonder that reflects on the "family's anger and determination to change the policy" that was expressed by the apparent subject "child" who was denied participation in some role that she had chosen for herself. The rejection was apparently based on her age ( too old or too young was not discussed ) and her size ( also not revealed ). I do not know the board involvement, but schucks folks; is this too dang much? The country is nertz. [/font]

#14 Olatunji

Olatunji

    New Member

  • New Member
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 14 January 2012 - 12:26 PM

Dear Mine gosh,
I think we and you are perhaps being had. The quote is quite amusing, yes. That a mall paper, unless somehow compelled to print this child's sqwawk by an IMPORTANT parent, contains such exclusive stuff along with the cream, chicken, cilantro and celery adverts is just too much. Then again there was the once reported case with SF Ballet where a fat kiddee was rejected for Nutcracker, I seem to recall, and suits were threatened by the litigious parents, whose lipid state was not reported. There was no follow-up to that which is remembered here. I like the nertz bit. The genuine subject, interfering boards, is important.

#15 Brioche

Brioche

    Inactive Member

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 176 posts

Posted 14 January 2012 - 05:48 PM

Dear Mine gosh,
I think we and you are perhaps being had. The quote is quite amusing, yes. That a mall paper, unless somehow compelled to print this child's sqwawk by an IMPORTANT parent, contains such exclusive stuff along with the cream, chicken, cilantro and celery adverts is just too much. Then again there was the once reported case with SF Ballet where a fat kiddee was rejected for Nutcracker, I seem to recall, and suits were threatened by the litigious parents, whose lipid state was not reported. There was no follow-up to that which is remembered here. I like the nertz bit. The genuine subject, interfering boards, is important.


Idiots every where I see. Perhaps the "Chron" is more reputable.

http://www.sfgate.co...OJT7.DTL&ao=all




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):