What's Wrong With Being a "Flagship Soloist" or "Junio
Posted 15 June 2012 - 09:33 AM
McKenzie seems to suggest that there is nothing wrong with being a "flagship soloist" or a "junior principal" at ABT.
I think a lot of people would take a different view. Stella Abrera, just to name one person, has been performing principal roles for years at ABT, but she does not receive the pay of a principal. Nor does she receive the status of being a principal, although she is doing principal work. In spite of the foregoing, she no longer seems to be on a principal track at ABT, and it seems less and less likely that she will be promoted.
I thought this would be an interesting topic for discussion.
Posted 15 June 2012 - 10:00 AM
Posted 15 June 2012 - 11:25 AM
Posted 16 June 2012 - 02:00 AM
I think that McKenzie's first sentences was quite telling: "It soon became pretty evident that every good artistic decision is a lousy business decision. And vice versa."
I think that can apply to personal-relation decisions within a company, too. -sigh-
Does anyone know how it works - pay-wise - in ABT and other US-American companies? Where I am, usually if one does not have "solo" in your contract, then anytime one does solo work, one gets a bit of extra pay; and if one does principal work (as "just a soloist") one often gets even more extra. (though of course it does depend on the individual workings of the contract)
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. (If it doesn't appear below, your computer's or browser's adblockers may have blocked display):