Misty Copeland - Divided Views

[vipa]

I can only speak for myself but I can't view one matinee performance . . . on an overseas tour . . . in Australia's third largest city . . . as representing some kind of grave injustice, especially given how this one performance stands in stark relief to ABT's 75 year history in this regard.

As others have noted, Misty getting an opportunity to perform the lead in Swan Lake didn't cost Stella Abrera or Sarah Lane a thing. Even if McKenzie hadn't cast Copeland, he was never going to give that matinee to Abrera or Lane. As FauxPas noted, that handwriting has been on the wall since McKenzie cast Hee Seo (Hee Seo!!!) for two back-to-back Swan Lakes in the Spring. If there's blame to be apportioned, it should all go to the artistic director.

As for Copeland exerting some kind of deleterious effect on the company with her public/published comments, I would put those far down the list after other deleterious things, including adjusting the repertory to accommodate an aged Julie Kent, Paloma Herrera stagnating artistically, McKenzie casting Seo in roles for which she is clearly unsuited, Veronika Part relegated to matinees, bringing in Polina Semionova over promoting an internal candidate, and even promoting Isabella Boylston over Abrera.

I agree with you about Kent & Herrera.

It seems to me McKenzie was always interested in Copeland. After her first summer intensive, he wanted her to stay and she turned him down. After she got into the company her body changed (she started getting her period), then she gained a lot of weight (which she later lost.) There were many points in time when McKenzie could have let her go, but he stuck with her. I see this as a belief in her talent.

Personally I prefer Lane's dancing, but McKenzie has never shown a real interest in her, or tried to develop her. She's used when short men need a partner with a Theme & Variation type technique.

I think Copeland will get promoted, and why not? Lesser dancers have been principals in ABT. I'll never buy a ticket, but the publicity will sell lots. As a result maybe a lot of African American girls will study ballet. Lane is never going to be promoted, much to my dismay. It seems Abrera's chance has come and gone. I'd rather Copeland than an import.

[Amour]

FauxPas wrote:

Misty was articulate and not bitter and mentioned that everything that she is, opportunities that came to her and successes she has achieved have all come through ballet. Racism was not stressed but overcoming racial stereotypes and promoting diversity were the main theme.

About 2 years ago Gia Kourlas wrote an article for the NYT where she interviewed several ABT dancers about how they felt about Kevin bringing in foreign big name guests or hiring them as principals. Misty sounded very bitter saying something like ABT forgets everything it's own dancers have done when it brings in these "outsiders". She very specifically criticized Kevin. Sarah Lane, who that winter had gone through the whole Black Swan/Natalie Portman ordeal, basically held her tongue and said nothing.

I think Misty is just out for herself and seems to have no qualms about openly challenging ABT to explain her circumstances. Whatever arguments are convenient and possible to make, she'll make them. She is the one who has brought race into this equation, which is why the topic is fair game for anyone to bring up. I somehow doubt Calvin Royale would want to make the same arguments (he is a wonderful dancer so why wasn't he promoted to soloist and Gorak was). If Stella or Sarah were so openly challenging, perhaps they'd get more roles, too. I do feel Misty has been trying to back Kevin and the board into a corner which is I think iwhat people are responding to, not the topic of race per se.

[miliosr]

Misty has been trying to back Kevin and the board into a corner which is I think iwhat people are responding to, not the topic of race per se.

To which I would reply: Kevin McKenzie and the board always have the power of 'NO'. There's nothing to prevent them from ignoring pressure from any dancer seeking favored treatment. If they're too weak to say no in the face of sustained pressure -- of any kind -- from a dancer, then they should all resign because they're obviously not up to the task of being stewards of a major arts organization.

[Amour]

Misty has been trying to back Kevin and the board into a corner which is I think iwhat people are responding to, not the topic of race per se.

To which I would reply: Kevin McKenzie and the board always have the power of 'NO'. There's nothing to prevent them from ignoring pressure from any dancer seeking favored treatment. If they're too weak to say no in the face of sustained pressure -- of any kind -- from a dancer, then they should all resign because they're obviously not up to the task of being stewards of a major arts organization.

I actually think that ultimately they will say NO to principal for Misty. But this drama occurs in EVERY ballet company. I think , for example, the Maryinsky has the most perplexing of all company policies. Only 1 Vaganova graduate (Batoeva) has been promoted above coryphee in Fayeyev's 6 years as acting AD? To think money, sponsorship, sexual harassment (alleged in case of Batalov) don't come into play is either naive or to not have personally known any professional dancers.

[dirac]

Misty has been trying to back Kevin and the board into a corner which is I think iwhat people are responding to, not the topic of race per se.

To which I would reply: Kevin McKenzie and the board always have the power of 'NO'. There's nothing to prevent them from ignoring pressure from any dancer seeking favored treatment. If they're too weak to say no in the face of sustained pressure -- of any kind -- from a dancer, then they should all resign because they're obviously not up to the task of being stewards of a major arts organization.

Adding to this that I see no problem with a dancer openly questioning and challenging management, actions which are just as likely to pose great risks as reap great (or any) benefits, since any pressure applied - assuming that is in fact what Copeland intends to do, which is plenty arguable - may have the effect of alienating the boss.

[sidwich]

About 2 years ago Gia Kourlas wrote an article for the NYT where she interviewed several ABT dancers about how they felt about Kevin bringing in foreign big name guests or hiring them as principals. Misty sounded very bitter saying something like ABT forgets everything it's own dancers have done when it brings in these "outsiders". She very specifically criticized Kevin. Sarah Lane, who that winter had gone through the whole Black Swan/Natalie Portman ordeal, basically held her tongue and said nothing.

I was curious about this, so I looked it up. This is the question from Ms. Kourlas and Misty Copeland's reply:

Q. What are the pressures of being in a company and having a constant stream of international stars?

COPELAND Proving yourself over and over: it never ends. I’ve been in the company for 11 years. It’s almost like they see a show, they’re thrilled, and then the next day their memory was erased, and you start from scratch. I think it’s just a constant proving that you’re as good as these stars that may not even have the same capabilities or great technique, but they’ve made a name for themselves.

Personally, I don't find this response particularly bitter. I think it's a truthful statement of life in a major ballet company that dancers are constantly working to prove themselves. I don't think she particularly calls out McKenzie either.

You may be thinking of Sean Stewart's response which is much more critical of the policy:

STEWART I think having a couple of guest artists is great because it can add and diversify, but I think that using guests artists as a replacement for the entire company is a bad idea. It goes back to catering to what you think audiences want instead of educating them to want something else, and I think it’s important for a company to decide what it wants to present and build an audience from there, as opposed to: Oh, this year, Russians are in.

[Amour]

No, I think both of them sound pretty bitter. That's just how it sounded to me. Basically, (if I remember correctly) everybody complained except Sarah. Gia did her job getting people riled up and talking (journalists!).

[sidwich]

Actually, the reason Ms. Lane didn't respond is because she wasn't there. You must have missed this part of the article:

Rehearsals prevented Ms. Copeland and Ms. Lane from being present the entire time — midway through the interview they swapped places.

Here is the link in case anybody would like to read the interview in its entirety: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/arts/dance/american-ballet-theater-dancers-in-conversation.html?pagewanted=all

[Amour]

Thanks for posting the link. As you can see Sarah said, "I think whether you're in the corps de ballet, a soloist or a principal, we're all dancers, and we really enjoy the opportunity. Unless you're really new to the company, I don't think it's something you freak out about. It's something you're happy about because then you get a chance to work on something and think about it about grow and develop."

Quite a contrast in tone to Misty, don't you think?

[Amour]

BTW, sidwich who do you "they" referred to in Misty's comment, unless it's Kevin? Ballet masters don't decide who gets to join the company, so it's not them.

[sidwich]

Thanks for posting the link. As you can see Sarah said, "I think whether you're in the corps de ballet, a soloist or a principal, we're all dancers, and we really enjoy the opportunity. Unless you're really new to the company, I don't think it's something you freak out about. It's something you're happy about because then you get a chance to work on something and think about it about grow and develop."

Quite a contrast in tone to Misty, don't you think?

Considering, Ms. Lane is answering a completely different question:

Q. What is it like to perform so many principal parts?

And, as I pointed out, Ms. Copeland doesn't even have the opportunity to answer this question, t don't think it's a fair comparison at all. It's comparing apples and organs.

[sidwich]

BTW, sidwich who do you "they" referred to in Misty's comment, unless it's Kevin? Ballet masters don't decide who gets to join the company, so it's not them.

Actually, my interpretation was that Copeland was referring to the audience being thrilled by performances. But I completely bow the fact that that's open to interpretation.

[kfw]

About 2 years ago Gia Kourlas wrote an article for the NYT where she interviewed several ABT dancers about how they felt about Kevin bringing in foreign big name guests or hiring them as principals. Misty sounded very bitter saying something like ABT forgets everything it's own dancers have done when it brings in these "outsiders". She very specifically criticized Kevin. Sarah Lane, who that winter had gone through the whole Black Swan/Natalie Portman ordeal, basically held her tongue and said nothing.

I was curious about this, so I looked it up. This is the question from Ms. Kourlas and Misty Copeland's reply:

Q. What are the pressures of being in a company and having a constant stream of international stars?

COPELAND Proving yourself over and over: it never ends. I’ve been in the company for 11 years. It’s almost like they see a show, they’re thrilled, and then the next day their memory was erased, and you start from scratch. I think it’s just a constant proving that you’re as good as these stars that may not even have the same capabilities or great technique, but they’ve made a name for themselves.

Personally, I don't find this response particularly bitter. I think it's a truthful statement of life in a major ballet company that dancers are constantly working to prove themselves. I don't think she particularly calls out McKenzie either.

I don't assume it's bitter, not having heard her tone of voice. On the other hand, telling the world I'm-better-than-my-colleagues, and-I-deserve-what-they-have-more than-they-do isn't too classy either. And no, she doesn't call out McKenzie alone, she calls out everyone who has a say in casting.

[vipa]

It seems to me that the discussion boils down to Misty's race, and did being black provide greater or fewer opportunities. IMO race ultimately worked in her favor. So be it.

[kfw]

It seems to me that the discussion boils down to Misty's race, and did being black provide greater or fewer opportunities. IMO race ultimately worked in her favor. So be it.

I think that's far too simplistic a characterization. Race ought to work in her favor; as I said again just this evening, we can all agree that when talent allows (and hers does), diversity is good for ballet (and for the country). The questions are about whether or not she's used race ethically or as a blunt instrument, making questionable accusations the accused have no good options for rebutting, simplistically and uncharitably conflating racism and tradition, by implication belittling the talents of dancers above her in rank, and playing to the crowd for sympathy.

[Amour]

It seems to me that the discussion boils down to Misty's race, and did being black provide greater or fewer opportunities. IMO race ultimately worked in her favor. So be it.

I think that's far too simplistic a characterization. Race ought to work in her favor; as I said again just this evening, we can all agree that when talent allows (and hers does), diversity is good for ballet (and for the country). The questions are about whether or not she's used race ethically or as a blunt instrument, making questionable accusations the accused have no good options for rebutting, simplistically and uncharitably conflating racism and tradition, by implication belittling the talents of dancers above her in rank, and playing to the crowd for sympathy.

Personally, I think she's used race as a blunt instrument and this 16 page discussion shows just how polarizing a figure she is.. However, if ABT is looking to diversify I hope this trickles down to Calvin Royale and Gabe Shayer, both of whom are IMO much better and more refined dancers than Misty.

[mira]

and the beautiful Courtney Lavine.

[sandik]

It's comparing apples and organs.

Oh fun -- I've never heard that version before!

[sidwich]

It's comparing apples and organs.

Oh fun -- I've never heard that version before!

[sandik]

It's comparing apples and organs.

Oh fun -- I've never heard that version before!

I'm serious -- I think you should make that your variation!

[Plisskin]

IMO, if Misty were white , did not have wealthy sponsors, and was not a relentless self promoter, she'd still be in the corps.

What is this alluding to? That Misty's position in the company is via Affirmative Action or based on her race? Misty dances in the United States,well known world wide for it's racism. With the lack of black dancer's in ballet, Misty's race is more of a hindrance than a positive. And it also completely ignores the white privilege that Misty is not afforded with. I just find this statement baffling, especially considering that most of the soloists and principals not just at ABT, but in the western hemisphere, are white. Sponsors or not. Have we forgotten during Misty's "media blitz" that so many of you balletomanes take issue with, that she is only the 2ND black soloist in ABT's entire existence? And the first was over 20+ years ago?

And their are other soloists (and principals), such as Abrera and Lane (that Misty herself is stealing roles from. Apparently, she is a casting director), whom have sponsors. Hee Seo is asian and a technically (and arguably artistically) weak principal. Does this also apply to Seo or is this only relegated to Misty?

-------------------------

Apparently in the ballet world dancers can no longer talk about their negative experiences (particularly black dancers and racism) without suspicion that their experience is fraudulent and being used to elevate their status for promotion. And they must name the perpetrators. Hopefully they'll have a lawyer on hand because that is a potential lawsuit of defamation that they will lose to.

I find it interesting that this level of vitriol and suspicion in regards to Misty and her story hasn't been seen in white ballet dancers when they tell of their personal, negative experiences in the ballet world. Some have even written books about it.

I think the only people whom find Misty polarizing are ones who use terms like "race card".

[kfw]

The questions are about whether or not she's used race ethically or as a blunt instrument

On second thought, "blunt instrument" was a poor choice of metaphor, with unfair associations I didn't intend. I can't think of another that seems apt at the moment, so that's all I'll say.

[abatt]

But isn't merit really subjective in this case? I have read opinions of others who are not untutored in classical ballet, and they happen to like Copeland as a dancer.

I honestly don't believe that if Stella and Sarah were so vastly superior to Copeland, her presence could hold them back.

The other way of looking at it is that Misty is not so vastly superior to Stella and Sarah, so one has to consider what factors tipped the balance in Misty's favor for being cast in SL.

[abatt]

I think Misty is just out for herself and seems to have no qualms about openly challenging ABT to explain her circumstances. Whatever arguments are convenient and possible to make, she'll make them. She is the one who has brought race into this equation, which is why the topic is fair game for anyone to bring up. I somehow doubt Calvin Royale would want to make the same arguments (he is a wonderful dancer so why wasn't he promoted to soloist and Gorak was). If Stella or Sarah were so openly challenging, perhaps they'd get more roles, too. I do feel Misty has been trying to back Kevin and the board into a corner which is I think iwhat people are responding to, not the topic of race per se.

Agreed. This is the "squeaky wheel gets the grease" phenomenon, which Misty and her handlers have played brilliantly.

[aurora]

But isn't merit really subjective in this case? I have read opinions of others who are not untutored in classical ballet, and they happen to like Copeland as a dancer.

I honestly don't believe that if Stella and Sarah were so vastly superior to Copeland, her presence could hold them back.

The other way of looking at it is that Misty is not so vastly superior to Stella and Sarah, so one has to consider what factors tipped the balance in Misty's favor for being cast in SL.

This is ridiculous.

1) This is an art form. Opinions are at least somewhat subjective. The AD thought that she was better suited to the role than they, and honestly given the generally positive views she received and my own opinion of at least Sarah's limited emotional range, I don't disagree. So opinions can vary.

2) It is not like she's been getting all the great leading roles and the others have not. She has NOT been cast as the lead in many full lengths. Certainly in no more than the others. She got this one. In a matinee, on tour. It wasn't opening night in NY... Sarah has been cast in SB, Misty certainly hasn't. Both were in Coppelia. In fact although I believe they were made soloists at the same time, Misty waited much longer for a lead role in a full length than Sarah did. So can we please stop acting like she has been receiving some outrageous favoritism, when there is simply no evidence of any such thing.

Some of you simply prefer the other dancers and dislike her. That is your prerogative.

A lot of what has been said here, however, is really beyond the pale.

When Sarah gets cast "over" Misty do we always need "to consider what factors tipped the balance in [sarah's] favor?" I don't think so. So why do we when Misty is cast?

The answer is, we don't.