Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

How Should ABT Renew Itself?


Recommended Posts

For me, the renewal of the company will largely be determined by who it chooses to promote in the next couple years. If Copeland is promoted, it will signal the beginning of the end for me. There have always been principals who are not my favorites (Irina comes to mind), but I've always thought that they deserve the rank.

I couldn't agree more. Catering to the lowest common denominator. Depressing. I'm going to see NYCB at SPAC (mainly because I love them and think they are SO much better than ABT right now) but partially to get this awful ABT season out of my mind.

Link to comment

Are these on YouTube?

They aren't, but my husband captured them and is putting them (minus the curtain calls) on blu-ray. I'll try to post them on YT under my name there (balletjones which is also my Twitter handle ) once the process is finished. Believe it or not, to get a really good video (without any jerky motion) it takes the computer about 4 days to make a disc. Try looking at YT in around 5 days under my channel. The different ballets (I'll put them up separately) are : The Lady and the Hooligan (w/Korsuntsev), Les Divertissements Du Roi (for Kolb), Scheherazade ((Ivanchenko ) and Tango For Three (all 3 men). I'll try to put up the Kolb piece first. It's choreographed by the Russian choreographer I named upthread: Maxim Petrov (though Russian, 1 piece I saw was very 'American" and the other very "French") I thought it was the most impressive.

Link to comment

I wish there were tour funding for ABT to hit the 50 states. Dancers learn to perform by performing. Perhaps all the rep could use more performing.

I'd love ABT to tour the US more too.

That said, on the topic of smaller venues like college campuses and early dancer exposure, isn't that what ABT II does? When I was at Indiana University, they swung by for a few performances (Kylian, a classical pas de deux, and a random piece to Holst's "The Planets") and masterclasses.

Link to comment

Copeland will be promoted, whether we like it or not. I'll honestly be shocked if she is not promoted. And while a lot of people (esp. those on this board) will be upset, Misty's fans (who do but tickets to see her) will drown them out.

All I can say is that there better be a promotion for Stella as well. I am prepared for a Copeland promotion, but if Stella is passed over again, after her triumphant Giselle, I'll be angry.

And I'd just like to add that if one can find nothing redeeming about the entire spring season, than why torture yourself and go? Yes, there have been some major disappointments this year, but there have also been some magical moments like Stella and Shyklarov's Giselle, or Gillian's Juliet that have happened during this wretched, horrible, catastrophic, demoralizing, terrible no-good spring season.

Link to comment

But it is shameful that Peter Martins seems to be the only ballet leader that is active seeking out new choreographers.

Hmmm ... I think I must respectfully disagree here. It seems to me that Martins rarely, if ever, commissions new work from choreographers who haven't already established themselves as a brand, with the obvious exceptions of company members such as Christopher Wheeldon, Justin Peck, and Melissa Barak. (Note that Troy Schumacher had been working on his own for a few years before Martins began commissioning work from him.) Martins is to be lauded for his insistence on new work and for fostering The New York Choreographic Institute, but I'd consider him pretty cautious when it comes to awarding commissions -- he's not the kind of AD who's going to color outside the lines, so to speak. PNB's Peter Boal is bolder in this regard, and it will be interesting to see what Lourdes Lopez does in Miami post-Morphoses.

Link to comment

I don't think New Yorkers want to feel like they're watching a regional company that flies in its stars.

A very small point, and I'm not sure how you define "regional company," but they typically do not fly in stars.

I do see notices for Nutcrackers offered by ballet academies that fly in stars and call themselves "Small City Ballet Company," but not otherwise. This country is fortunate to have a wealth of very worthwhile regional companies -- Atlanta, Houston, Colorado, Cincinnati, Sarasota, Ballet West, at a minimum, and others if you broaden the definition to include Joffrey, PNB, San Francisco, Boston. Many of them got their start from early help from NEA or the Ford Foundation or just very determined founders. I've seen many of these companies and am rarely disappointed. The caliber of talented dancers all over the country is very high and it breaks my heart that so many of them don't have more opportunities for long contracts, touring, etc.

Link to comment

I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that Misty Copeland will be made principal at the end of this season. The box office and her PR team have made that a fait accompli, in my opinion. And fine, I understand that issues other than pure talent and skill need to be considered and accounted for.

How I actually feel about and interpret her promotion when it happens, though, will be completely dependent upon who else gets promoted along with her. Does either Stella or Sarah get promoted as well? (I have a really hard time imagining Kevin actually doing that, but setting that aside.) If so, then I'll consider it a fair deal, the sort of concession that needs to be made for the viability of the art as a business.

Link to comment

A very small point, and I'm not sure how you define "regional company," but they typically do not fly in stars.

I suspect cobweb may have been thinking of the types of companies that ABT principals themselves often get flown in to for yearly Nutcrackers. That's not uncommon, is it?

Link to comment

I suspect cobweb may have been thinking of the types of companies that ABT principals themselves often get flown in to for yearly Nutcrackers. That's not uncommon, is it?

For ballet academies, yes, that seems to be common. But for the companies I list by name (and others I forgot to include), they have plenty of their own dancers to handle Nutcracker duties and do it well.

Link to comment

For ballet academies, yes, that seems to be common. But for the companies I list by name (and others I forgot to include), they have plenty of their own dancers to handle Nutcracker duties and do it well.

I'm thinking, for example, of a video I've seen on YouTube of Veronika Part dancing in Baltimore Ballet's Nutcracker back in 2007. Not one you mentioned, but (I'm guessing) not a ballet academy either, and what I imagine one would call a "regional company."

Link to comment

I'm thinking, for example, of a video I've seen on YouTube of Veronika Part dancing in Baltimore Ballet's Nutcracker back in 2007. Not one you mentioned, but (I'm guessing) not a ballet academy either, and what I imagine one would call a "regional company."

Actually, it looks like a very successful ballet academy that does Nutcracker and maybe one other thing each year.

https://www.baltimoreballet.com/

I am not in any way disparaging such "companies." Everybody needs performing opportunities and the local communities need to see ballet live and in person. Perhaps some will be motivated to support their local arts council or write to their members of Congress to support NEA funding!

"Regional company" is a little vague. I hope as BAers travel this country, they take a look at the local companies, if their schedules coincide, especially the ones I've named. I suspect you'd be pleasantly surprised at the quality of the productions and dancers.

Link to comment

"That said, on the topic of smaller venues like college campuses and early dancer exposure, isn't that what ABT II does? When I was at Indiana University, they swung by for a few performances (Kylian, a classical pas de deux, and a random piece to Holst's "The Planets") and masterclasses." ~ Choriamb
----

Perhaps these do not make it onto the ABT online performance calendar? I find it odd that there is nothing much on there. One would think this was the final season.

[just finally saw Mussel's post... I can't think why anyone in marketing would not want to indicate those performances coming up... even if ticket sales were not yet available... even if money comes from donors more than ticket sales, filling seats and demand for those seats is important... and the buzz of people talking about upcoming performances ... ]

Link to comment

Hmmm ... I think I must respectfully disagree here. It seems to me that Martins rarely, if ever, commissions new work from choreographers who haven't already established themselves as a brand, with the obvious exceptions of company members such as Christopher Wheeldon, Justin Peck, and Melissa Barak. (Note that Troy Schumacher had been working on his own for a few years before Martins began commissioning work from him.) Martins is to be lauded for his insistence on new work and for fostering The New York Choreographic Institute, but I'd consider him pretty cautious when it comes to awarding commissions -- he's not the kind of AD who's going to color outside the lines, so to speak. PNB's Peter Boal is bolder in this regard, and it will be interesting to see what Lourdes Lopez does in Miami post-Morphoses.

Peter Martin's commitment to new work is not simply by commissioning work. All the choreographers you name, Wheeldon, Peck and Barak, came through the SAB schooling system and/or through NYCB. While Martin's might've delayed commissioning their work and he is by no means a perfect AD, the system (NYCB/SAB) he leads has cultivated these choreographers. Lets not forget about Edward Liang too. I don't think any of their work is on par with Balanchine, but I don't think that is merely a coincidence that these choreographers come from his establishment. ABT has recently presented Marcelo Gomes choreography, but as much as I respect him as a dancer, I don't think choreography is his strong point. Also, I personally feel he got his chance to choreograph based on his star power that comes from being a principal. I highly doubt KM would ever commission a corps member to create a new ballet for the company.

Link to comment

I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that Misty Copeland will be made principal at the end of this season. The box office and her PR team have made that a fait accompli, in my opinion. And fine, I understand that issues other than pure talent and skill need to be considered and accounted for.

How I actually feel about and interpret her promotion when it happens, though, will be completely dependent upon who else gets promoted along with her. Does either Stella or Sarah get promoted as well? (I have a really hard time imagining Kevin actually doing that, but setting that aside.) If so, then I'll consider it a fair deal, the sort of concession that needs to be made for the viability of the art as a business.

If Copeland gets promoted and Stella and Sarah stay behind, I say we pool our money together and start a new company. ABC (American Ballet Company) and hire Stella and Sarah as principals! (in a perfect world) With Copeland, Bolyston, and Seo shaping up to be KM's newest leading ballerinas, I think its clear that artistically the company is suffering. I'll be interested to see how Copeland does in Swan Lake. She isn't the strongest dancer, so it'll be interesting to see how she powers through the Black Swan PDD. In dress rehearsal at the Washington Ballet, she couldn't get through her 32 fouettes. She always, even in the performances, travels to the right like crazy during her fouettes. In DC she ran out of room and then started doing turns from 5th. The Met, IMO, represents the Olympics of ballet. While I understand everyone is human and capable of mistakes, dancers should be able to handle the technical challenges of the roles they are performing. Who wants to watch a dancer struggle to get through a ballet? They'd be so focused on not messing up that you'd probably lose any artistic interpretation. I've seen Copeland dance too many soloist roles where she falls off pointe, out of turns, or in Queen of the Dyrad's falling out of Italian Fouettes. (Hee Seo was just as inconsistent as Queen of the Dyrads, so maybe KM doesn't really mind). Its upsetting because every time I see Stella dance, she is so professional. She isn't the strongest dancer, but she holds her own! She clearly comes out rehearsed and looks as if she has practiced the more challenging elements of her variations over and over. You can tell she remains calm and focused and has everything drilled into her body and mind. In a clip of her dancing in Australia Odette/Odile, Copeland started her fouettes in the far left corner (really old) and basically did them on the diagonal! How can KM really make her a principal?

Link to comment

Peter Martin's commitment to new work is not simply by commissioning work. All the choreographers you name, Wheeldon, Peck and Barak, came through the SAB schooling system and into NYCB. While Martin's might've delayed commissioning their work and he is by no means a perfect AD, the system (NYCB/SAB) he leads has cultivated these choreographers. Lets not forget about Edward Liang too. I don't think any of their work is on par with Balanchine, but I don't think that is merely a coincidence that these choreographers come from his establishment. ABT has recently presented Marcelo Gomes choreography, but as much as I respect him as a dancer, I don't think choreography is his strong point. Also, I personally feel he got his chance to choreograph based on his star power that comes from being a principal. I highly doubt KM would ever commission a corps member to create a new ballet for the company.

I absolutely agree that Martins has continued -- and, one might argue, actively expanded via The New York Choreographic Institute -- NYCB's tradition of cultivating home-grown choreographers. (And we should add Benjamin Millepied to the list of choreographers who have come into their own during the Martins regime.) And, as I mentioned in my original post, he should be lauded for it. When Martins looks outside of his own organization, however, he rarely selects a choreographer who hasn't already built a solid reputation as an established talent (Ratmansky, e.g.) or a generated a ton of buzz as a hot young newcomer (e.g., Scarlett). So yes, Martins cultivates talent in-house and commissions new work from the usual suspects, but I don't think I'd go so far as to say that he's "the only ballet leader that is active seeking out new choreographers."

Martins is probably the only AD in the US who's managed to secure the kind of funding the systematic, large-scale cultivation of in-house choreographic talent requires; he's also got the biggest pool of talent to draw from. Other ADs, including McKenzie, simply don't have those resources. Keep in mind that ABT pays Ratmansky almost as much as it pays McKenzie; there probably aren't too many dollars left to develop a pool of in-house choreographic talent, and the company may not see that as critical to its mission. McKenzie and the Board (and this board, too wink1.gif ) may think the company's money is better spent elsewhere -- maintaining its bread-and-butter rep of big story ballets, e.g., or its heritage works, or its Ashton rep.

Link to comment

Among my ardent balletomanes friends I do not know one who thinks Copeland deserves promotion on the basis of her dancing.. The question is always will her promotion bring in a new audience and, if so, is that worth the trade off.

This may be true, but on the other hand I am one who thinks she deserves to be a principal at least as much as Boylston & Seo do. Mind you, I don't think any of them are at that level, I think Boylston & Seo are both talented dancers who need much more work (on different aspects of their dancing) and should still be soloists.

Obviously, the powers that be at ABT disagree with me. Just as obviously, for whatever their reasons, ABT management doesn't think Lane or Abrera are principal material.

Given those realities I do not think promoting Copeland is a crime. IMO she still needs work, but as ABT has no problem promoting unfinished dancers to principal status and she sells out performances - both of her scheduled NY debuts were 100% sell outs - I don't have a problem with it.

Link to comment

I wish there were tour funding for ABT to hit the 50 states. Dancers learn to perform by performing. Perhaps

It would be rough, but I'd love to see them do the old Ballet Russes tours, 2 days here, three days there... There are college campuses all over America that have performance spaces... Ok, they cannot stage like the Met, but, ABT could show something! Why on earth can we not have the so called National Endowment for the Arts fund tours again? Yes, I'm dreaming. Can we start a petition? Crowdfunding? Anything?

I know. Dream on.

But perhaps the internet which continually evolves could bring to flower a little ballet for the U.S....

(she steps onto her little soapbox to speak on a favorite topic)

The NEA's Dance Touring Program, which was the first large project that the agency undertook after it was founded, flourished in the 1970s. Their model, which combined a mechanism for dance companies (mostly in NYC) to tour throughout the country by giving support to local presenters, and a set of requirements that encouraged significant interaction between the company and the host community. These were mostly residencies, rather than the old-school "roll up to the theater door, put on a show, and leave for the next town" model. The dance company would be presented by a local organization that would run a series of events (master classes, lecture-demonstrations, open rehearsals) that would lead up to the actual performances. Most of these residencies lasted 1-2 weeks, but some were as long as a month or more. The host organizations were often schools (a descendent of the old college gymnasium circuit), since they usually had the right combination of facilities, although many straight-ahead presenters (from the Hurok years) would collaborate with a local school or studio for the education piece.

The program did sponsor some fairly large ballet company tours, although generally not ABT or NYCB -- they had their own touring systems at the time. The Joffrey did a number of tours on the DTP, but the biggest impact came for modern dance companies. Even the largest and most established groups had a hard time putting tours together at the time, but this structure gave them access to a roster of presenters around the country who were pre-vetted by the NEA, and who were looking for a bigger project than a single night stand. If a company could combine a few of these residencies, they could more than double the weeks of employment for their dancers, and increase the amount of time that a choreographer might have with their dancers. Rather that piecing together a living from day jobs that were flexible enough to accommodate a rehearsal life, dancers could actually live on a combination of touring income and unemployment (running these programs through established institutions really cut back on the under-the-table nature of most performance payment.) They had much more time to rehearse and to train -- this really changed the expectations for dancer's lives.

Alongside these changes for dancers and dance companies, the communities that were sponsoring the residencies were getting a much more significant look at the art form than they'd had in the past. It helped develop a larger and more discerning audience, as well as recruiting a larger group of aspiring performers. Those dancers didn't all leave their hometowns -- many of the dance communities around the country (including Seattle, my home town) got a significant boost from these residencies.

The NEA shifted the DTP around several times in the early 1980s, until they finally closed it out to concentrate on other projects, but you can still see the results of that project in the structure of many dance companies and communities around the country.

(she steps off the soapbox with thanks for your time and attention)

Link to comment

Copeland is no worse than Seo, Boylston, Simkin, Whiteside, and Stearns. ABT has jumped shipped yeaaaarrrss ago with these promotions, which is why the company is in such a pickle right now with a lot of lackluster principals. Why people on this board, and apparently off it, focus on her and treat her as the Armageddon of ABT I have no idea.

ABT will renew itself by coming into the 21st Century and getting rid of it's old, tired tradition of being a ballet company in name only/ star driven company. They have enough money and the talent, they just need a new vision to take the company to better heights where McKenzie and his board can't take it. If they spent their money on coaching and growing their talented dancers, and 21st century marketing more people would come. They need to stop with the international touring right now as well and try to save up for their own theatre instead. They could have had one years ago if that was the focus...

Link to comment

This may be true, but on the other hand I am one who thinks she deserves to be a principal at least as much as Boylston & Seo do. Mind you, I don't think any of them are at that level, I think Boylston & Seo are both talented dancers who need much more work (on different aspects of their dancing) and should still be soloists.

Obviously, the powers that be at ABT disagree with me. Just as obviously, for whatever their reasons, ABT management doesn't think Lane or Abrera are principal material.

Given those realities I do not think promoting Copeland is a crime. IMO she still needs work, but as ABT has no problem promoting unfinished dancers to principal status and she sells out performances - both of her scheduled NY debuts were 100% sell outs - I don't have a problem with it.

Agreed.

And I'm sorry, but whether or not one thinks Copeland principal material, the fact that her fouettes traveled on a diagonal in her first ever foray in a role is not a great reason to question whether one is principal material. If so, many of the great principals of history should never have been principals, including Makarova, who at times struggled with her fouettes, if I recall correctly, and Ferri.

Nevermind Maria Kowrowski who I saw bail on the fouettees less than halfway through in Martins's Swan Lake (and she was a seasoned principal).

[note, obviously my second point is not responding to NYSusan!]

Link to comment

and 21st century marketing

This part is essential! I would say that ABT marketing is a disaster, but it doesn't even exist in a sufficient form to be given that term. They seriously need help in this area. When it comes to ABT renewing itself, this is essential!

Link to comment

This part is essential! I would say that ABT marketing is a disaster, but it doesn't even exist in a sufficient form to be given that term. They seriously need help in this area. When it comes to ABT renewing itself, this is essential!

Definitely! Add to that a 21st century website and an app that works!

Link to comment

In dress rehearsal at the Washington Ballet, she couldn't get through her 32 fouettes. She always, even in the performances, travels to the right like crazy during her fouettes.

I'm in agreement with Aurora about fouette ability. Quite frankly, Julie Kent's fouettes have never, in any of the performances I've attended (spanning 14 years), been up to snuff. She travels a lot. Also, there's lots of criticism about Copeland's inability to act with her face. Again, I find it necessary to point out that I've always considered Kent to be an ice princess when it comes to facial expressiveness, so much so, in fact, that I finally began avoiding her performances. So on those two points, at least, I think we have to be fair to Copeland.

I think some arguments about her "body type" border on racism. Sometimes the very same people who denounce Copeland's muscles were silent on Wendy Whelan's when she was still performing. If ever there was a body that causes one to suck in one's breath upon first (or second or third or fourth, etc.) encounter, it was Whelan's. I found it excruciating to watch her perform, even while I recognized her genius. I think that we all have body type preferences in ballet, and that's fine, but I do think we need to be fair about them.

I think the issue - the reason why Copeland's dancing is criticized so much down to every last detail - is that people feel she's "bought" her stardom via indefatigable self-promotion. It's regarded by many as being unfair. I'm not entirely sure what to believe, quite frankly, but I've been leaning in one direction lately. I know it's supposed to be all about the dancing itself, but let's face it: That disappeared when ABT began its sponsor a dancer program. If I were to find fault, it would be in the board's decision to turn ballet dancing into a money contest among dancers. A wealthy person can, and does, easily hold powerful influence over an artistic director. And sometimes that sponsor has a mission that has nothing to do with ballet, as is often seen in the Russian ballet world. Is ABT drawing closer to that ethos?

And let's always remember it's who you know. Copeland is doing, in this modern age, what many other ballet dancers have done in the past and present. The difference is that she has a particular distinction - her color - from the other dancers, so people most certainly take note of her. As a parent to someone who went on to become a professional dancer, I have personally witnessed, at the pre-professional ballet academy level all the way up through auditions for ballet companies and then roles within professional companies that "What can you do for me?" holds considerably more weight than the dancer's actual dance-ability. The dancer with a famous parent and/or very wealthy parent will invariably be chosen over a dancer with slightly better technique because the ballet school and ballet company must think of finances first. Misty Copeland isn't doing anything that hasn't already been done before. She's just using modern technology to do it. Do I like it? No. But I don't find her offensive for it.

Link to comment

I think some arguments about her "body type" border on racism. Sometimes the very same people who denounce Copeland's muscles were silent on Wendy Whelan's when she was still performing. If ever there was a body that causes one to suck in one's breath upon first (or second or third or fourth, etc.) encounter, it was Whelan's. I found it excruciating to watch her perform, even while I recognized her genius. I think that we all have body type preferences in ballet, and that's fine, but I do think we need to be fair about them.

I don't think you can compare Wendy Whelan and Misty Copeland. Whelan was not dancing major full length classics. I think Copeland is very talented, but i don't feel she is right for a principal position at ABT. Ballet is subjective so we can disagree. I think Copeland has something to offer, just not within the ABT repertory. Call me old fashion, but I feel someones promotional track should be based on their work, without the distractions of social media etc. To me, Copeland doesn't offer principal ready or principal potential performances. My point about fouettes, isn't that she can't have weaknesses. Obviously every dancer has their strengths and weaknesses. I wouldn't want to see Alessandra Ferri as Kitri. Part of this is KM casting his female principals in ballets they might not be suited for. We see this with Hee Seo as well. But, Copeland seems to spend an awful lot of time promoting her books, her story, etc. She is at a point in her career where she needs to really "work" (be in the studio, getting coached, etc.) I am suggesting that all her distractions might be harming her progression as a dancer and as an artist. Typically when dancers have a challenging step, they rehearse it over and over. Sometimes they even make adjustments. Copeland doesn't seem to have that level of commitment. Its unfair to the other dancers that are putting in the work, Lane, Abrera, etc. But in the end, I guess life is unfair.... I would hope that KM, the board and administrative staff would have standards and position ABT as a world-class product that sells itself. All their mismanagement and inability to control and manage talent (cancelations, losing promising dancers to other companies, inability to develop dancers, etc.) has jeopardized that company's ability to market itself as a world class product that sells itself. When I go to the ballet, I want to see Juliet, Giselle, Odette, Kitri, etc. I want to see the dancer's characterization. IMO, knowing all this background information about a dancer takes away from their ability to see a character come alive. I'm always watching Misty Copeland, not watching Juliet, etc. It takes away the magic of the art form. I feel many of Copeland's fans praise her for what she has overcome and what she has accomplished to get to where she is. She deserves praise for her story. However, when she is performing I want to praise her for what she is actively producing on stage. To date, her "producing" on stage hasn't been worthy (IMO) of a promotion at all. And this is not a statement on her race, because I would say this about any dancer, regardless of color, religion, etc that was in Copeland's position. I remember when Copeland first joined the company and thinking she was SO talented. I used to always watch her when she danced in the corps. I don't see the same dancer anymore. Not sure if she is consciously or subconsciously changing, but her dancing and artistic develop have suffered and in some ways gone backwards.

Link to comment
I know it's supposed to be all about the dancing itself, but let's face it: That disappeared when ABT began its sponsor a dancer program. If I were to find fault, it would be in the board's decision to turn ballet dancing into a money contest among dancers. A wealthy person can, and does, easily hold powerful influence over an artistic director. And sometimes that sponsor has a mission that has nothing to do with ballet, as is often seen in the Russian ballet world. Is ABT drawing closer to that ethos?

Some really good points vagansmom and I see your points, especially the sponsorships part. I am not sure but it seems other companies don't have or don't announce individual dancer sponsorships? I haven't seen it for Houston or Boston, but I may be wrong. IMO, I believe it would be better served if sponsors donate to one giant pot, they can still show their own names but just not be named directly to individuals, so all are on an equal playing field but the sponsors still get the credit for helping the company?

Link to comment
I think the issue - the reason why Copeland's dancing is criticized so much down to every last detail - is that people feel she's "bought" her stardom via indefatigable self-promotion. It's regarded by many as being unfair. I'm not entirely sure what to believe, quite frankly, but I've been leaning in one direction lately. I know it's supposed to be all about the dancing itself, but let's face it: That disappeared when ABT began its sponsor a dancer program. If I were to find fault, it would be in the board's decision to turn ballet dancing into a money contest among dancers. A wealthy person can, and does, easily hold powerful influence over an artistic director. And sometimes that sponsor has a mission that has nothing to do with ballet, as is often seen in the Russian ballet world. Is ABT drawing closer to that ethos?

No disrespect meant to Lucia Chase, but she financed the early days of Ballet Theater in part because she wanted to dance and wanted a company to dance with.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...