Dancers at auction

[Alexandra]

Today's New York Times has an article about the current practice of sponsoring dancers.

(copied over from today's Links)

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/15/arts/dance/15KINE.html

...In a surprisingly entrepreneurial move, American ballet companies have recently begun allowing donors to sponsor individual dancers, for amounts that range from $2,500 to $100,000 a year. Some ballet companies even compile and distribute rosters, which look eerily like shopping lists, specifying their dancers' ranks and prices.

Pros and cons?

[Ostrich]

Well, first of all, I think it could lead to a lot of snobbism.

"I sponsor so-and-so. Whom do you sponsor?"

Secondly, I think it may put the dancers under a lot of extra pressure, especially if the companies start relying heavily on this kind of sponsorship. If the dancers don't come up to the expected mark, they may be in danger of loosing their sponsor.

Then the other side of the coin: "I'm sponsored by so-and-so. Who are you sponsored by?"

On the other hand, I think the companies figure out that the public is often more motivated to donate money to a specific cause or person than to the company in general, which may, after all, put it to uses with which the sponsor is not happy. This way everyone gets to choose the dancer he feels is most worthy of sponsorship, which I am sure will make people more motivated to donate money to the ballet companies.

[Alexandra]

Good points! Of course, ballet companies always need money, but this is going to lead to all kinds of trouble. What happens to the House Ballerina -- in some ways the most valuable company principal, always there when you need her, never injured, but not the star, not the headliner, or, to put it another way, the last girl picked for the soccer team. (And the dancers will know exactly where they stand. Who got picked first, who last? Who got the Board Member from Hell? Who got the more prestigious one? Etc.)

[Farrell Fan]

I dug out a program from the ABT spring season and note that every principal dancer has a sponsor. The text next to each photo lists name, birthplace, date joined the company, and sponsor. In some cases the sponsor is a financial institution. Some people sponsor more than one dancer. The total effect is weird -- as though this is a group of money-grubbing free-lancers rather than an established ballet company. I'm waiting for the day when some dancer will be sponsored by "Anonymous." Are there any self-effacing rich people left?

[Alexandra]

Maybe they'll start wearing little baseball caps with their spoonsors' names on them....

Good question, Farrell Fan. When I win the lottery, I might sponsor a dancer, but I'll insist on the program listing being "sponsored by Anonymous."

I guess this is the ballet world's version of Building Syndrome. I'll give you all my money if you'll just put my name on the building. ("My name is Ozymandias, king of kings. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair." They should read more Shelley.)

[Clara 76]

The whole thing sort of makes me feel uncomfortable...I know for myself, if I had a 'Sponsor' I might feel obligated to them in some way-not a very healthy atmosphere in my opinion.

I guess Houston's way of doing it might not feel as pressurized-sponsoring the position and not the dancer.

However, to be perfectly realistic, if it's a question of the company staying afloat, that does have to take precedence.

Clara 76

[sandik]

I like the reference to Ozymandias, and I think it has great relevance here. Almost all of us live and work in art communities that have been the recipient of significant private sponsorship. In years past, the public face of that sponsorship was usually fairly subdued -- the name of the hall might match the name on the check, but usually the acknowledgements were limited to the list of donors in the program or on a lobby card. Some of these people had extraordinary influence backstage, but that wasn't always public knowledge.

These kind of "naming" events are far more prevalent today, in all part of our culture. In Seattle, we wound up tearing down the Kingdome (named after its location in King County) to build two new sport stadiums, Safeco Field for baseball (for the insurance company), and the just-now-named Qwest Field for football (for the local phone company). Inside of these things are named rooms, seats, sections, and who knows what all else (I'm not a big sport fan). The new remodel of what used to be called the Opera House (where PNB performs) made it into Marion Oliver McCaw Hall (cell phones) -- I am still trying to get my friends and colleagues to refer to it as Mom Hall. Inside, each of three lobbies are named after different donors, the theater itself after another set, and a small lecture hall after another. Not to mention sections of the landscaping, a couple meeting rooms and a couple other features. Inside the theater, a large proportion of the individual seats are "sponsored" as well. (My sister and I joked that if they had offered sponsorship rights to stalls in the bathrooms we would have been tempted -- one of the sorely needed improvements in the hall were more bathrooms!) The city has just opened a new library, full of "named" elements from rooms to book collections to general funds. The building itself is still, to my pleasure, called the Central Library, but if someone with the right check came up, that would be changed as well.

I'm not objecting to naming per se -- it's been a chance for someone who had an idea to help make it happen. There are Rhodes Scholars, Pulitzer, and Nobel Prizes, and many of the recipients of these have been arguably "better" people than the namesakes of their awards. As time passes, the name of the hall often becomes just a name -- "Carnegie" is better known to most of us as a series of libraries and a concert hall than as a ruthless industrialist, and perhaps that was part of his motivation. But at the point in time when the money changes hands it's important that people are very clear about what they're buying.

Since I live in Seattle I imagine I'm being overly sensitive, but I was rather put off my the image of Patricia Barker with a price tag dangling from her foot, especially since the article stated that PNB accepts donations to support positions in general, but not necessarily individual dancers. But who know how that might change.

[Alexandra]

I think also the auctioning off -- which I'm sure was done in good fun -- has very uncomfortable associations. Slaves dancing for their owners, the Russian serf ballerinas -- at least the Paris Opera dancers who exchanged favors for diamonds had a bit more say in the matter. Does a sponsor have the right to "request" that "his/her" dancer perform at daughter's wedding, son's birthday? What if a sponsor really is after a dancer, and the dancer isn't interested? Not saying that any of this is going on now, but check back in a decade.

[Herman Stevens]

My rant

I understand how these things work from a marketing POV - for many people the stars are the big attraction. They feel better betting their money on a winner.

However I strongly feel if you want to support a company - and I'm afraid I'm not in the position to talk about big-time financial support - you should watch more than just the handful of star principals.

Whenever I can I make sure to compliment, praise, and discuss their stuff with dancers in the demi-soloist &c positions. The ones who dance in fours and fives. These are dancers with quite individual styles too - it just takes a little more effort to spot 'em.

These dancers often dance more miles a night than the soloists; they don't get the flowers, the interviews and the top pay. And yet in every company there's a bunch of these people who do beautiful work, every time again. I think that's just great. If I had the money, I'd give it to those dancers rather than to the alpha girls who just buy another silly watch.

[pj]

What I was wondering when I started reading about this "sponsorship" thing, was how much "say" the sponsor has about the individual dancers. In other words, can a sponsor pay more for a dancer, thereby assuring the dancer's roles, or could withdrawl of a sponsorship lead to the dancer getting a pink slip?? Yikes! All of the possibilities in this day and age of corporate improprieties (and for that matter, lack of personal ethics) are simply mind boggling!!!

On the other hand, can a person with a large donation convince a company to hire their own dancing child?

I think I will have nightmares tonight.

[sandik]

On the sponsor having a "say" -- that happens already if, for sponsor, you read board member. It is just not quite so public.

[carbro]

Are ballet cos. now going to start raiding each other for dancers with the greatest fundraising potential? Is the very sexy dancer with limited prospects likely to be pushed to prominence in unsuitable roles because a sponsor threatens withdrawal?

All sorts of artistic consequences lurk beneath the surface, as well as aforementioned artists feeling beholden to individual sponsors. This kind of overpersonalization leads down a potentially very dangerous path, I fear.

[Alexandra]

I'd like to buy a ballerina, please, and I think she should dance the first performance of the new ballet by whatshisname.

Or, taking off from Herman's rant (with which I agree, for what that's worth): one could be subversive and bid on a corps member.

And to be REALLY subversive: "I'd like to sponsor Mr. X -- here's 100 grand. My only condition is that he NOT dance."

Clara, I do understand the need for coming up with creative ways to fund dance, but surely not anything goes, at least not yet. "I'll pay $100,000 for Ms. Doe's firstborn" might not get Board approval.

[Clara 76]

Oh, I agree with you Alexandra-I was purely trying to be diplomatic with regards to the situation.

I am thankful that our company doesn't do that and I think, knowing Gerard as I do, that he wouldn't even entertain the possibility.

I personally think that the money might be better spent going to Artists in the Schools programs, or some other organization that educates people about dance-classical ballet in particular, and promotes audience creation. Or perhaps to keeping ticket costs lower to encourage more people to come?

Clara

[Helene]

(My sister and I joked that if they had offered sponsorship rights to stalls in the bathrooms we would have been tempted -- one of the sorely needed improvements in the hall were more bathrooms!)

A friend of mine who is a member of Consolidated Works [in Seattle] told me that as a fundraiser/take-off on naming possibilities , the org did sell the naming rights to bathroom stalls and drinking fountains for its new building. I, too, wanted to endow a stall at Mom's Place, but then again, I wanted first dibs on that stall at at intermission...

Which brings me to the current topic. I think endowing specific dancers is a nightmare in the making. I'm not convinced wrangling doesn't go on between companies and donors concerning casting decisions, particularly where new productions are concerned, but I'm convinced that making it explicit and institutionalized is not the right way to go: tying a donor to a dancer on a yearly basis sounds like a recipe for manipulation and hurt feelings. (Not to mention getting lynched by cutting the line to get first dibs on the "Helene stall.") Unless the donor goes very publicly broke, if that name disappears, it's going to look like the donor stopped liking the dancer. Frankly, I'd be mortified to give money and expect a dancer to have dinner with me or acknowledge my presence in anything more than a general -- thanks to our donors -- way.

At the Symphony, like in academia, many chairs are endowed. So whoever is the Principal Kazoo at any given time gets to be the .bomb Principal Kazoo player, and I think the trusts are formulated so that .bomb doesn't get to pull it based on preference for the chair holder. I could see creating a trust for dancers' salaries, based on level. A way to honor a retired dancer is to start a scholarship trust for the affiliated school in that dancer's name, and other people can contribute to it as well and as they see fit.

[Edited to say what I really meant.]

[carbro]

Or, taking off from Herman's rant (with which I agree, for what that's worth):  one could be subversive and bid on a corps member.

Zhong-Jing Fang, a new ABT corps dancer is sponsored! Leapfrogged over a slew of soloists!

[dirac]

This is an idea of such gruesome badness that one hardly knows where to begin (although all of you have done just fine so far. ) I felt especially bad for the Atlanta Ballet dancer, who seems to be at the beck and call of this lady, with management’s full approval. “Ms. Courts plans to invite Mr. Welker over for dinner at her house, so her four sons can get to know him. ‘It really makes people human you admire from afar,’ she said.” Very disturbing.

[Alexandra]

I love "gruesome badness" Of course, no one MEANS to be bad. Someone had what seemed to be a great idea and no one said, "Hey, let's sit down and role play this one, to see what, if any, are the possible negative ramificaitons." But that's what Ballet Alert! is for

This kinda reminds me of the Adopt-a-Pothole program in Virginia and West Virginia (and I'm sure other states whose byways are unknown to me.) You see a pothole, you pay to have it fixed, your name is up there for life. (I also LOVE Helene's Reserve-a-stall idea. There could be a whole donor's bathroom....)

But seriously, the kindly donor who wants the dancer to come to dinner -- first for the family, but then, perhaps, for every visiting cousin and college roommate -- could, well, quickly become unpalatable.

A prediction. Within 2 years, someone will make a ballet calledl "Gruesome Badness."

[Herman Stevens]

Gruesome Badness

So.... who's the choreographer, most likely?

[Alexandra]

Save up enough money and you can buy the choreographer of your choice

[Mme. Hermine]

three acts, with a different choreographer for each one and a fourth one for the principals' solos, and a finale by boris eifman?

[perky]

I wonder what the marketing guru's will think up next? Can't afford to sponsor a whole dancer? Then you can buy a body part!

I'll take Miranda Weese's big right toe, and Albert Evans left buttock! :rolleyes:

[Mme. Hermine]

Or we could do a tie-in like having Simon and Garfunkel sponsor Angel Corella's left and right legs...i can see it, a solo to the 'sounds of silence'...

[BW]

Herman has asked who the choreographer might be for the Gruesome Ballet - I think Boris Eifman might do it for the right price. :angelnot:

Ah, it's so good that there's intelligent life here.

I felt as though I were in a vaccuum until I logged on here. Farrell Fan's lament

I'm waiting for the day when some dancer will be sponsored by "Anonymous." Are there any self-effacing rich people left?

set the tone quite well, I thought.

And Alexandra's

I think also the auctioning off -- which I'm sure was done in good fun -- has very uncomfortable associations. Slaves dancing for their owners, the Russian serf ballerinas -- at least the Paris Opera dancers who exchanged favors for diamonds had a bit more say in the matter. Does a sponsor have the right to "request" that "his/her" dancer perform at daughter's wedding, son's birthday? What if a sponsor really is after a dancer, and the dancer isn't interested? Not saying that any of this is going on now, but check back in a decade.

brings up just about everyone's darker concerns.

sandik, your posts

Sandik  (My sister and I joked that if they had offered sponsorship rights to stalls in the bathrooms we would have been tempted -- one of the sorely needed improvements in the hall were more bathrooms!)… I'm not objecting to naming per se -- it's been a chance for someone who had an idea to help make it happen. There are Rhodes Scholars, Pulitzer, and Nobel Prizes, and many of the recipients of these have been arguably "better" people than the namesakes of their awards. As time passes, the name of the hall often becomes just a name -- "Carnegie" is better known to most of us as a series of libraries and a concert hall than as a ruthless industrialist, and perhaps that was part of his motivation. But at the point in time when the money changes hands it's important that people are very clear about what they're buying...

On the sponsor having a "say" -- that happens already if, for sponsor, you read board member. It is just not quite so public.

made me laugh at first and then nod in appreciation.

Everyone's posts have been worth reading...but it appears as though we're all preaching to the choir here.

The sad fact is that pj, I do believe there have been occasions where a parent has contributed vast sums in order to have their offspring be given a spot.: dry: so, I think that what bothers many of us is the "in your face" nature of all this. Does that mean it's OK if it's done behind closed doors - no. But somehow this gives me the creeps - as did that poor dancer in Atlanta's comments about adjusting his schedule to fit the requests (not sure which word he chose, but I know which one I'd have chosen) of his patroness... and I found those photos of the dancers and their patronesses sickening. Interesting that they did not show a photo of a female dancer with a male patron, don't you think?

As for the young Chinese dancer,

Zhong-Jing Fang, a new ABT corps dancer is sponsored! Leapfrogged over a slew of soloists!

, I'm not surprised - she's amazing and someone has seen a sure thing and put it "on the nose"...or toes.

Many thanks Clara76 for pointing me in this direction. I'd posted a link to the article on the BT for Dancers in hopes of engendering some thinking...it's gotten a number of views so let's hope people are really reading the whole article.

Meanwhile, is there anyone here who really does think this is truly a good and wholesome idea?

[Clara 76]

I wonder if it has anything to do with the subject of another thread on BT under 'Aesthetic Issues' called Management: Why have a CEO? :shrug:

CEO Thread

The reason I bring this up is because it seems as the arts have been moving more towards a "Corporate" model, little things like ethics and morals suddenly seem to take a back seat.

I don't think they have anyone "sponsoring" dancers in Europe or anywhere else the arts are more government supported for that matter. But maybe I'm wrong.

And you're welcome, BW!

Clara 76