volcanohunter

Joy Womack has left the Bolshoi

275 posts in this topic

I recently read the biography of Monica Loughman, the first westerner admitted into the Perm State Ballet back in the 90's. While she had a lot of difficulty with the theater and some pay issues, she was given a lot of roles to dance and was not asked for sponsors. However, this may be because the theaters were enjoying more state support back then.

I always find it odd that there is so much resistance to Womack, but Loughman was given a lot of corps work, taken on all the tours despite visa issues, and even eventually given solos. I am not sure if this was because she was from Ireland and not the US, but I find it strange that she was accepted more easily back when the country was less accustomed for foreigners.

Either way, I think Womack is dodging a bullet here. The theater seems to be going through some serious issues and she should dance somewhere she is appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post

Perm is a smaller theater with a smaller troupe. I'd imagine that many corps de ballet members double in solo parts. The Bolshoi is a 200-member behemoth and I'm sure all 200 members all think they deserve solo parts, but only a small portion of them ever get those parts. In that climate it's not surprising that there are middlemen who take bribes from insecure corps de ballet members in exchange for lobbying for that corps girl to get a solo.

It's good that Womack was able to find another company and get out while she's still young.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe instead of asking for solo roles, the right question should have been how to be cast in the corps. Maybe the person was annoyed at her for asking to dance solo roles when she hasn't even been cast in the corps. Maybe the person made an unwise comment about paying for the opportunity. We really don't know what actually happened here. It's interesting to me that she "has so much respect" for the person who said the alleged comment that points to extortion. If she's not willing to give details, then why should we believe it without question? It's not that I don't feel for the girl but she does seem young and unaccustomed to experiencing the consequences of actions and statements. She needs the strong guidance of mature people to advise her right now. If she "just wants to be a ballerina," then be willing to work in the corps and earn the confidence of the company leadership. Time to mature without the pressure of being on stage as a soloist is a gift and the special nature of that gift seems to elude her and many others of her generation.



Share this post


Link to post

If she's saying that the person who told her about paying for roles was telling her "how it really worked," rather than being in on the extortion, it does make some sense that she's not disclosing the name and avoiding having that person be discussed in the media. Whether the person was serious, sarcastic, playing with her naivite, trying to convey the message that she was out of line, or simply downright cynical, we only know what she says about her reaction to the news.

When Gelsey Kirkland wrote in her first book that when she was a young person in the company, she was told that Balanchine would give major appliances to female dances who would let him grope them. The ballet community was up in arms that she dared slur Balanchine that way, instead of thinking how creepy it would be for a newbie to the company to hear this about a man that to many was godlike. Assuming she's sincere, this may be more about how Womack reacted than the intent of the speaker.

Share this post


Link to post

I am thinking this is more how the conversation went down. She inquired and they said she probably would not get roles without paying, given her inexperience. I do not think this rule applies to primas, but to those who just want buy a role even if they are not ready.

I am confused as to why at 19 she would think she would get solos. Absent a few prodigies like Smirnova and Vishneva, very few dancers start out with solos in their teens in ANY company, let alone a great one with 200+ dancers. Perhaps the comment was just the straw that broke the camel's back and her leaving was a long time coming.

I hate to make a sports analogy, but this reminds me of Tim Tebow, an American Football player. An athlete that does well in school, but not in the pros. When in school, he only has to compete with the best school-aged players. In the pros, he has to compete with all athletes that were the best of their schools.

Every person in the Bolshoi, even the lowest corps member, was the top of his or her graduating class. Now she has to compete with 100 female versions of herself, some who have been dancing with the Bolshoi and improving for 10 years or more. She may have had her confidence built up too much in school and not realized this.

Share this post


Link to post

I am thinking this is more how the conversation went down. She inquired and they said she probably would not get roles without paying, given her inexperience. I do not think this rule applies to primas, but to those who just want buy a role even if they are not ready.

I am confused as to why at 19 she would think she would get solos. Absent a few prodigies like Smirnova and Vishneva, very few dancers start out with solos in their teens in ANY company, let alone a great one with 200+ dancers. Perhaps the comment was just the straw that broke the camel's back and her leaving was a long time coming.

I hate to make a sports analogy, but this reminds me of Tim Tebow, an American Football player. An athlete that does well in school, but not in the pros. When in school, he only has to compete with the best school-aged players. In the pros, he has to compete with all athletes that were the best of their schools.

Every person in the Bolshoi, even the lowest corps member, was the top of his or her graduating class. Now she has to compete with 100 female versions of herself, some who have been dancing with the Bolshoi and improving for 10 years or more. She may have had her confidence built up too much in school and not realized this.

That sounds facile.

A lot of people are creating a lot of negative push back against girls who allegedly complain or quit based on this appearance of impatience for undeserved or unearned solo roles. I really doubt that happened. Certainly, the news and gossipy boards love to talk about it. Marketable armchair psychology. The publicity machine thereby accomplishes its mission, I guess.

You would be disillusioned, at the least, if you had been young, idealistic, naive, trusting, passionate, a perfectionist, devoted to creating art and beauty, taught to be an obedient follower, far away from home, and then came to a hostile environment in which you learned about and/or experienced, claques, acid attacks, threats, hacking, defamation, circulation of false emails and facebook hacks, unfair labor practices, nonpayment, breach of contract, breach of trust, glass in your toe shoes, political influence, improper treatment of respected artists, disloyalty, gamesmanship, forced abandonment of a teacher and star not currently in power, sexual favors with patrons and possibly others, infighting, and how the game is played through the making of payments. All while you were worrying about money you had not been paid and while you were starving and aching and exhausted, physically and emotionally, from working all day.

But I guess it is easier or more useful to say she was greedy and aggressive and a small fish in a big pond.

Share this post


Link to post

She was a small fish in a big pond, like most of the people in the company who are corps members, period. Every dancer in the company is in a situation where the director was attacked by acid and subjected to email and Facebook hacking and threatening phone calls the Fall before, and the nominee for the job before him was subject to a vile email and online campaign to smear him. Every corps member is living on a tiny salary in one of the most expensive cities in the world and without family money, significant other money, or sponsorship money is living with his or her family or in a group, like young people do in cities around the world. If there is glass in toe shoes, political influence, sexual favors with patrons, etc., 1. Every member of the company is working in the same conditions and subject to the same 2. She was not like David Hallberg, who did not attend the school and did not speak the language -- I'm not sure if he's yet learned Russian -- and whose lack of Russian language skills was accommodated: she attended the school, speaks Russian, and had three key years in which to observe what was happening in the main company: students are constantly performing with te main company throught their schooling. If she chose to keep her illusions when the truth was staring her in the face, it's really no one else's responsibility, however understandable the "everything's beautiful at the ballet" meme is prevalent.

As far as her contract was concerned, Urin has said they screwed up due to lack of experience with US dancers and tax issues. Her contract would not look like Hallberg's or a guest contract, and tax treaties between the US and Russia are different than tax treaties between Russia and other countries, because very few other countries in the world require tax reporting and payments even when their citizens are not physically resident in the US (or territories or working on behalf of the government and treated as residents.). Were they neglectful: certainly.

Almost every corps member at the Bolshoi was once a star pupil in the school, given private coaching and fussed over and was then relegated to the corps and neglected, not given solo parts, especially major ones. It's not surprising she felt frustrated, but she's really not much different and no more special than almost every other corps member of the Bolshoi. If she wanted something different -- she could have read Plitsetskaya's memoir to see that the Bolshoi in her head had little to do with reality -- she wasn't going to get it by magical thinking.

Share this post


Link to post

It's not surprising she felt frustrated, but she's really not much different and no more special than almost every other corps member of the Bolshoi. If she wanted something different -- she could have read Plitsetskaya's memoir to see that the Bolshoi in her head had little to do with reality -- she wasn't going to get it by magical thinking.

By some accounts, though, Womack wasn't coming up with these ideas about being different herself—or at least not on her own. Didn't she receive a red diploma? And the repeated statements that she was "widely expected to be soloist" in 2013 or similar—those can't have come without at least a bit of support from other sources.

Share this post


Link to post

The Bolshoi last held auditions on September 16. Twenty-four applicants were invited to participate, and they came from Moscow, St. Petersburg, Ufa, Saratov, Voronezh and Minsk--so only Belarus was represented among foreign countries. In a TV report on the auditions Sergei Filin emphasized that he was looking for dancers who learned quickly and would be able to fit into the Bolshoi corps without difficulty. He also said the company was looking for tall dancers. Ultimately nine were hired.

The curious thing is that while the segment emphasized that the audition was for the corps and that's where the dancers would be expected to perform, Boris Akimov complained that the candidates were uninteresting and lacking individuality. Filin complained that the quality of dancers was unsatisfactory, that they were insufficiently trained and prepared--and of course in Russia that sort of observation by an AD about the quality of training at its schools is a very loaded comment.

Share this post


Link to post

Red diploma means you've graduated with perfect marks in academic subjects and perfect marks in every artistic subject. From what I gather, it's not given out terribly frequently, but someone else can probably speak with more authority as to this point.

Share this post


Link to post

If she were 19, and had spent only a year in the company, I think she woke up pretty quickly.

I did not say that she did not face much competition. I did not say that she could or could not come up to speed eventually, or did or did not want to pay her dues. I am just saying that the arm-chair psychology type of quick clean up proffered by the theatre or the media, to avoid discussing the issues she faced or avoid ameliorating them, is reductionist.

Did she even say she was leaving because she could not (yet) get solo roles? Or did she say that she was insulted or (shocked or frightened?) that she was told about payments of fees related to solo parts. I read her say she was insulted by the sexual offers that she had received and the demand for a sham marriage. Certainly, that has nothing to do with being a small fish.

Maybe the poor girls who did not leave did not have that opportunity. Maybe they are not paid so they are forced to become involved with rich patrons, like wage slaves.

Share this post


Link to post

Please link to where she said she was hit on sexually and the "arm-chair" psychology of the theater, of which I see no evidence. Urin was direct and business-like, and didn't stoop to personal attack or condescension.

The sham marriage was for citizenship reasons, and, was, of course illegal, but she did what she needed to do for her career, which she still thought was worth it at the time. She wasn't tied up and led to the altar, and the marriage was to the son of a well-connected person.*

*Please see correction later in the thread. She was married to a fellow student.

Share this post


Link to post

From the NY Times phone interview with Womack:

Ms. Womack has declined to name the Bolshoi official who said a $10,000 payment would get her a soloist role. She said the figure was mentioned after she had repeatedly pressed managers about her desire for prominent roles. Since her graduation, she was offered few chances to perform, she said.

From this quote, it seems that one of her main goals was to dance "prominent" roles. (Like her fellow corps members, I'm sure). If she wasn't given opportunities to perform, then that goal seems unlikely in this company. This is not an uncommon state among ballet dancers. To advance in their careers and meet individual goals, sometimes dancers need a "change of scenery." In those cases, it's usually wise to do this without burning bridges...

Share this post


Link to post

But I guess it is easier or more useful to say she was greedy and aggressive and a small fish in a big pond.

I wouldn't say it was greed, but it was unrealistic to think any dancer would get lots of solos and prominent roles at 19. Yes, there are exceptions, but most girls her age in any company in the world are in the corps. I don't blame her for what happened, in fact I believe the school and the adults in her life led her to believe something that may not have been true. If they didn't see potential then it was their duty to have a serious talk with her about it, not let her enter into this toxic environment. She may have not know what was up at the theater, but her teachers and the people who let her in sure as hell did. It may have been unwise to let her start down a path if she was that naive.

I don't doubt she has been through a lot, and I think she is obviously a very strong person to withstand it so far. Dancers should not be subject to the conditions you describe. However, I was pointing out that she is obviously not the only person in the company who is subjected to this maltreatment. And she is not first dancer in the world to not be getting the roles she feels she deserves. All sorts of professions have this same type of problem. Take a big New York law firm for example. Every attorney there would have been top of her class at an Ivy league law school. You think she's going to be doing high profile trials after her first year? That doesn't mean she isn't smart or has the potential to grow, but it means she is a first year and will be treated like all the other first years in the firm.

Clearly the Bolshoi is not for the faint of heart. I have no doubt she will excel, but this may not be the right fit.

Share this post


Link to post

Please link to where she said she was hit on sexually . . ., of which I see no evidence.

"She spoke casually of the theater’s cruelty, its corruption, the sexual “skeletons in its closet,” and admitted that she been hardened by her experiences there. ...

Womack talked about this practice openly when we met in January at a cafe up the street from the Bolshoi. She said she had been “given an opportunity” which she described as, “I want you to be my lover, and I will support you.” Deeply insulted by the offer, Womack says she refused. “

Wednesday link, http://world.time.com/2013/11/13/american-ballerina-quits-bolshoi-accuses-theater-of-extortion/

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know if this is appropriate, but if any of you haven't listened to the Joy Womack interview on the Ballet Initiative podcast, you might find it interesting. Sorry I don't have the link.

Share this post


Link to post

I hope that this will not be a violation of board rules.

At the beginning of October Joy Womack sent off a series of angry tweets, written entirely in hashtags, in which she made essentially the same allegations she made in her Izvestia interview. At the time I did not draw anyone's attention to the tweets, though I'm sure I wasn't the only person who saw them, because I suspected she was overflowing with frustration and might later regret her posts. And indeed, by the following morning Moscow time she had deleted them. (No, I haven't got screen shots of them.)

Obviously, things didn't get any better for her because just over a month later she left the company and gave a reporter her reasons. My point is simply that whatever may have happened, Womack spent at least a month considering her decision.

Share this post


Link to post

She was a small fish in a big pond, like most of the people in the company who are corps members, period. Every dancer in the company is in a situation where the director was attacked by acid and subjected to email and Facebook hacking and threatening phone calls the Fall before, and the nominee for the job before him was subject to a vile email and online campaign to smear him. Every corps member is living on a tiny salary in one of the most expensive cities in the world and without family money, significant other money, or sponsorship money is living with his or her family or in a group, like young people do in cities around the world. If there is glass in toe shoes, political influence, sexual favors with patrons, etc., 1. Every member of the company is working in the same conditions and subject to the same 2. She was not like David Hallberg, who did not attend the school and did not speak the language -- I'm not sure if he's yet learned Russian -- and whose lack of Russian language skills was accommodated: she attended the school, speaks Russian, and had three key years in which to observe what was happening in the main company: students are constantly performing with te main company throught their schooling. If she chose to keep her illusions when the truth was staring her in the face, it's really no one else's responsibility, however understandable the "everything's beautiful at the ballet" meme is prevalent.

As far as her contract was concerned, Urin has said they screwed up due to lack of experience with US dancers and tax issues. Her contract would not look like Hallberg's or a guest contract, and tax treaties between the US and Russia are different than tax treaties between Russia and other countries, because very few other countries in the world require tax reporting and payments even when their citizens are not physically resident in the US (or territories or working on behalf of the government and treated as residents.). Were they neglectful: certainly.

Almost every corps member at the Bolshoi was once a star pupil in the school, given private coaching and fussed over and was then relegated to the corps and neglected, not given solo parts, especially major ones. It's not surprising she felt frustrated, but she's really not much different and no more special than almost every other corps member of the Bolshoi. If she wanted something different -- she could have read Plitsetskaya's memoir to see that the Bolshoi in her head had little to do with reality -- she wasn't going to get it by magical thinking.

Just wanted to say I agree with these observations and they're very astute.

Regarding the sham marriage: she was married for a short period of time (I read one month, I believe but perhaps it was longer) and is already divorced, because she thought it would help her get somewhere. What I find surprising is that it is not difficult to read online the Russian requirements (in English or in Russian) for obtaining 1) visas 2) legal employment 3) residency and 4) citizenship. In either language it is clear that marrying a Russian does not get you any of the above (not in the short term at least).

Before moving to Russia I did extensive reading about the requirements for legal working visa and the tax requirements for dual residency or Russian residency as a foreigner and what taxes need to be paid, to whom, at what %, and when. It's not the Bolshoi's responsibility to be aware of US tax law. They are responsible for adhering to tax requirements within their own country only. It is the individual's responsibility to file a Federal US Tax return whether residing in the US or not, as Helene I think pointed out. Furthermore, when signing an employment contract in Russia, the contract lists the amount of tax that will be deducted from your paycheck based on your status. She would have seen what that percentage was before signing. As a tax resident it should be a flat 13% along with the rest of the country. It is higher for other categories (I have to check as this has changed recently, but I believe it's higher if you have not been in Russia long or are not officially employed, or are a subcontractor etc).

And a final thought: casting couch policies exist in nearly every company on the planet. We don't hear about them in the mainstream press but they happen. So I'd extend the comments in that area as well. If she was exposed to those comments, she was not the only one. But it's up to the individual how they react, whether they succumb, if they work hard without the bribes or try to take /give money to get somewhere faster. It is a fact that not every (or even many) corps members are paying bribes to get on stage. The below is very very true:

[from writer]

...I was pointing out that she is obviously not the only person in the company who is subjected to this maltreatment. And she is not first dancer in the world to not be getting the roles she feels she deserves. All sorts of professions have this same type of problem. Take a big New York law firm for example. Every attorney there would have been top of her class at an Ivy league law school. You think she's going to be doing high profile trials after her first year? That doesn't mean she isn't smart or has the potential to grow, but it means she is a first year and will be treated like all the other first years in the firm.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree that women all over the world face these sorts of difficulties, probably more so within the world of performing arts, where there are rarely clear guidelines or oversight and where there is enormous competition for roles. I also agree that dancers live and work under terrible conditions all over the world.

However, the fact that it happens on a large scale does not mean that it is right, nor does it mean that any dancer is wrong when she points out the injustices that she was subjected to. Giving out roles for money rather than for talent is an injustice, even if Womack doesn't have the talent to get a role without it. Asking for sexual favors in return for roles is an injustice.

It seems to me that Womack has done everything that she can in the situation. She can't take the matter to the police - even in the US that would be an extraordinarily difficult thing to do, with huge amounts of political and financial repercussions. She has secured another situation (and I would point out in a Russian company, so clearly she enjoys and appreciates living in Moscow and doesn't believe that this is a particularly Russian problem). It makes me angry that things like this happen. I wish all the best to Womack and hope she succeeds at the Kremlin ballet.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree that buying roles and getting ahead for sexual favors is infuriating and in a perfect world, we would only see those who work hard, have the ability, training and stage presence succeed. The world is not perfect and as Helene and Catherine have pointed out, this girl is not the only one who has, is, or will find the world to be imperfect. She doesn't sound naive in that podcast nor is her story really all that unique. Many dancers go far from home in their teens, the vast majority spend years if not their entire career in the corps and all will see inequity in casting and promotions. She's also not unique in experiencing the realities of an imperfect world, yet her reaction to the "realities" she experienced is so extreme and so public. Many other dancers at Bolshoi and other companies world-wide have had similar realities thrown in their face, but how many can snag an interview with the New York Times to vent?

What makes Womack unique is her direct line to the press. This first year professional even has a topic on Ballet Alert! Why do we even know about her? Womack has used the press and social media successfully to promote herself and now promote her "scandal." In the podcast, she says she has 3 facebook pages, twitter, tumbler, instagram, etc.Unlike traditional media, there is no fact checking, no confirming with independent sources. Reader beware; there is murkiness in her facts. What was her rank? She says she is a soloist in the podcast. Filin says she was in the corps. Was she a member of Bolshoi or was she on production contracts? Then there's the sham marriage that points not to naiveté but looks more like a calculated choice. It makes her anger and "shock" seem disingenuous.

What does seem clear is that all the hard work, sacrifice and her calculated choices didn't work out for her at Bolshoi and she's angry and using the media to vent. Her anger and disappointment are understandable but it seems that a quiet move, without press attention, to a company where she will have opportunities would have been the better choice for her career. Hopefully, she will find peace and opportunity at her new company (the details remain murky here too as she will neither deny or confirm her plans to dance at the Kremlin Ballet).

Share this post


Link to post

I agree that women all over the world face these sorts of difficulties, probably more so within the world of performing arts, where there are rarely clear guidelines or oversight and where there is enormous competition for roles. I also agree that dancers live and work under terrible conditions all over the world.

However, the fact that it happens on a large scale does not mean that it is right, nor does it mean that any dancer is wrong when she points out the injustices that she was subjected to. Giving out roles for money rather than for talent is an injustice, even if Womack doesn't have the talent to get a role without it. Asking for sexual favors in return for roles is an injustice.

It seems to me that Womack has done everything that she can in the situation. She can't take the matter to the police - even in the US that would be an extraordinarily difficult thing to do, with huge amounts of political and financial repercussions. She has secured another situation (and I would point out in a Russian company, so clearly she enjoys and appreciates living in Moscow and doesn't believe that this is a particularly Russian problem). It makes me angry that things like this happen. I wish all the best to Womack and hope she succeeds at the Kremlin ballet.

I think men and women face these problems.

Many people, including on these boards, seem to be angry with her for complaining about something bad, because it is not unique to her, and everyone else faced it. Maybe she was taught not give up her seat on the bus. Maybe she thought she was protecting the other girls and boys by speaking up for them, describing their suffering and inequities. Maybe they tried to quiet her with threats and she didn't want anyone else subjected to the same suffering that she experienced.

Of course, maybe she could have found a more strategic way to help them if she had not spoken up, or refused to be silent, or lie about things.

Share this post


Link to post

[from writer]

All sorts of professions have this same type of problem. Take a big New York law firm for example. Every attorney there would have been top of her class at an Ivy league law school. You think she's going to be doing high profile trials after her first year? That doesn't mean she isn't smart or has the potential to grow, but it means she is a first year and will be treated like all the other first years in the firm.[/color]

Gosh, does any first year in a big firm do anything other than review documents in a conference room or sit in a library doing research? Who on earth would expect to let a first year, untrained and billing at the lowest rate, conduct a trial? I can't even imagine wanting to do such a thing.

Share this post


Link to post

Before moving to Russia I did extensive reading about the requirements for legal working visa and the tax requirements for dual residency or Russian residency as a foreigner and what taxes need to be paid, to whom, at what %, and when. It's not the Bolshoi's responsibility to be aware of US tax law. They are responsible for adhering to tax requirements within their own country only...As a tax resident it should be a flat 13% along with the rest of the country. It is higher for other categories (I have to check as this has changed recently, but I believe it's higher if you have not been in Russia long or are not officially employed, or are a subcontractor etc).

There are treaties, though, that require the taxing authority to tax at a higher rate for foreign nationals resident in their countries, which would make the theater responsible for that withholding for certain types of income. I don't see documentation for contractors, but the treaty rate for the Russian Federation is 25% for pensions, for example, which establishes that the Russian Federation is part of international tax treaties for withholding. I know that between the US and Canada many companies insist on a big tax withholding rate for Canadian residents who contract in the US, despite rulings that this is not required.

Gosh, does any first year in a big firm do anything other than review documents in a conference room or sit in a library doing research? Who on earth would expect to let a first year, untrained and billing at the lowest rate, conduct a trial? I can't even imagine wanting to do such a thing.

Yet those first years often have three years of reviewing documents and sitting in a library doing research during their minimum 80-hour/week summer internships during law school, were editors of their Law Reviews, and were mentored not only by the best academic legal minds, but also by teachers with years of actual experience in some law schools. If they can't expect more than anonymous scut work as a first year, why would a newly minted member of the corps at the equivalents of Skadden, Arps, et. al. expect special opportunities?

I agree that women all over the world face these sorts of difficulties, probably more so within the world of performing arts, where there are rarely clear guidelines or oversight and where there is enormous competition for roles. I also agree that dancers live and work under terrible conditions all over the world.

However, the fact that it happens on a large scale does not mean that it is right, nor does it mean that any dancer is wrong when she points out the injustices that she was subjected to. Giving out roles for money rather than for talent is an injustice, even if Womack doesn't have the talent to get a role without it. Asking for sexual favors in return for roles is an injustice.

Sexual harassment and blackmail are not right, and it is not wrong to point out injustices, no matter how many people are involved. Womack has not accused the theater of of asking for sexual favors in return for roles or sexual harassment by anyone in the theater. She specifically states that she does not accuse Filin of anything.

In my list of things that all the dancers faced, men and women, were 1. The attacks on Filin and Yanin and the environment this created 2. The low pay 3. The reality of being a top student in the school with attention and accolades and transitioning to the corps, where featured roles are the rare exception, not the norm, and how every corps member was subject to it. All but the first are legal and expected, and the first she was exposed to as a school member. Womack's complaint that the reality of the Bolshoi didn't match with her teenaged fantasy is not the Bolshoi's problem, and the fact that nearly all dancers faced the same environment, the same low pay, and the same career issues means she's not a special snowflake: she's someone with a lower tolerance point who had a chance to walk (unless she was fired) and opportunities to do something else without uprooting from her country and family. Even so, while walking away and not having a reasonable opportunity to dance is crushing, even if they were faced with non-stop sexual harassment on the job, dancers can walk away, however hard it would be: they are not girls sold into sexual slavery by their families.

Dmitrichenko accused Filin of casting for sex with him (SF), but it is unclear from any of the reporting that's been translated into English at least that Dmitrichenko was making the accusation based on his opinion/observation/personal conversation with the women themselves/hearsay, or whether he made the accusations on behalf of dancers who filed a complaint with him in his role as a union rep. In addition, there is an official news summary above of the initial police investigation, in which the police looked for possible motives, which talks about women who allegedly had sex with Filin, some of which ended badly (a firing for one), but who gave them that information is not disclosed.

Another sexual harassment accusation against the Bolshoi management, most prominently by Anastasia Volochkova about another Bolshoi administration, is that dancers were forced to go to fundraising and post-performance parties and have sex with major donors afterwards. Dancers all over the world are expected to go to fundraising parties and receptions; it is only criminal if the dancers are told that they either have sex with the donors, or their careers will be ruined. Womack does not make this accusation.

Womack has said that a person with whom she had a conversation about her career, and whose name she won't disclose out of respect, told her that she could pay $10K to get a role, or she could find a sponsor to lobby for her. She also says that a man offered to be her sponsor in exchange for sex. Unless the theater would retaliate unless she did -- and she hasn't accused the theater of this -- the theater isn't responsible for the entitlement showed by a member of a class of men for whom a ballerina is an attractive prize.

As far as sponsors are concerned, theater administrators and ADs are on the record as saying that sponsors, boyfriends, etc. are a waste of their time. A sponsor can only try to use influence: while material goods and a nice place to live are entirely within the control of a sponsor, there is no guarantee that having sex with a sponsor will get any dancer any roles, tour opportunities or promotions. As Filin put so directly in court, sleeping with him didn't get his wife any roles or promotions, and he was in direct control of the casting and promotions.

Dmitrichenko accused Filin of financial malfeasance in distributing special funds. So far, he has not accused Filin of taking money for roles, and neither does Womack.

Since Womack hasn't gone into detail about the conversation she had about her career, there's no way to know if it was a cynical remark or part of a long conversation with details of how the entire payoff system worked (or an offer to tell her if she was interested).

Many people, including on these boards, seem to be angry with her for complaining about something bad, because it is not unique to her, and everyone else faced it.

I can only speak for myself, but I am hardly angry with her for complaining. I think she was stupid to think she could throw a Twitter Tantrum, delete the tweets, and make accusations in the press and assume that she could walk away without further comment.

Maybe she was taught not give up her seat on the bus. Maybe she thought she was protecting the other girls and boys by speaking up for them, describing their suffering and inequities. Maybe they tried to quiet her with threats and she didn't want anyone else subjected to the same suffering that she experienced.

I see no ways in which she was protecting any of the other "girls and boys" by making an accusation and then attempting to run. It's a blip in the Russian press in the middle of a maelstrom, and it's a pretty lame set of accusations in the midst of all of the others. The Russians don't care what an American says about them; she comes across as another clueless American who thinks life is supposed to be fair and a meritocracy and is trying to impose PC American values on them; the NYT won't have any influence over what happens in Russia. The Bolshoi doesn't care what anyone says about them (except for maybe Novikova, their press representative who must be pulling out her hair). Urin made her look stupid and naive when he told her to put her money where her mouth is with an easy, thoroughly professional dismissal. None of the other American students in the Bolshoi school are walking out and taking their tuition with them.

Womack is no Rosa Parks.

Share this post


Link to post