Stecyk

This Thursday, June 18, at 9 pm, CBC will be showing Alberta Ballet's Balletlujah.

Framed by intimate and revealing interviews woven through spectacular dance performance, Balletlujah explores the emerging friendship and spiritual connection shared by one of Canada's most iconic artists, k.d. lang, and Alberta Ballet Artistic Director Jean Grand-Maître, as they work together to adapt the performances in Alberta Ballet's acclaimed stage production to the screen - including stunning dances set to the backdrop of vast golden prairies, a country bar, and a picnic with horses galloping in the distance.

Read more about the show here.

The July issue of Vanity Fair, featuring Caitlyn Jenner, has an article titled, "Tchaikovsky's New Queen," that profiles Misty Copeland. As far as I can tell, potential readers can't view the article online. You must either purchase a paper copy of the magazine or access an electronic version through a tablet or smartphone or other device. I could be wrong, however.

At 32, she is the first crossover star the ballet world has seen in decades, with a guest-judge stint on Fox’s So You Think You Can Dance, an Under Armour campaign that went viral, special appearances on Prince’s Welcome 2 tour, and a feature film in the works. Copeland is a member of the President’s Council on Fitness, Sports & Nutrition, and she recently performed at the Kennedy Center of Honors—all of this while dancing at A.B.T. in repertoire ranging from Alexei Ratmansky’s Firebird to Twyla Tharp’s Sinantra Suite. Her success in almost all while world of classical ballet has shattered biased conventions and traditions, and she has become a powerful voice for diversity as well as awareness of women’s body-image issues.

There are two full-sized photographs that accompany the article, too.

Still, what a PR stunt:((

This comment isn't directed at you specifically Amour. I am just a little surprised by the animus displayed when no one has all the facts.

How many people do you think are going to partake in this amazing PR stunt? Hundreds of thousands, millions, or possibly more?

Perhaps the hotel, wanting to capitalize on her recent visibility, approached ABT and Misty Copeland asking if she'd be willing to help them sell a few extra hotel rooms? Given Misty's recent success with Under Armour, 60 Minutes, and Tony Awards, I doubt this hotel gig is on the same scale. If you were Misty and were asked, what would you do?

If I were in her pointe shoes, I know what I'd do. I'd accept. If I could promote my book, ABT, and ballet in general, I'd be game. And why not?

As one who is not intimately familiar with ballet, I want to ask how does one quantify such items as balance, partnering skill, control, or ability to dance in time with the music? Is that simply a numerical rating based on someone's opinion? In other words, is it similar to ice figure skating where judges provide numerical scores? Would all observers provide the same numerical score?

If we are looking at the height and weight of dancer, that's quantifiable. Bring out an accurate tape measure and scale, and then we know the height and weight. Those attributes can be quantified reliably and repeatedly.

Artistic attributes such as partnering skills would seem somewhat different?

I enjoyed last weekend's 60 Minutes segment on Misty Copeland. Not being a balletomane, I can't comment on the technical aspects of her art. That said, I think the segment was more about the accomplishments of an individual who overcame severe obstacles that would have stopped most of us dead in our tracks. An African American born into poverty and starting very late--most might argue too late--into a ballet program would not be expected to reach her heights.

In my opinion, part of the segment was to recognize her accomplishments and another part was to get us to ask ourselves: If she can do all that with her initial disadvantages, how are we using our time and our natural skills to our best advantage?

As far as becoming a principal, obviously that is Copeland's sought after goal. Even if she doesn't achieve her life long ambition, she's accomplished a lot. Moreover, with her multi-year contract with Under Armour, she likely has lucrative second income source. Moreover, she is getting exposure to another complete set of opportunities.

Being a longtime Under Armour shareholder, I liked the segment even more as I though it was one long commercial featuring one of UA's stars.

Switching topics, I like Helene's post:

I think it depends on how direct a person is. The elevator test can to a useful technique to step back and review whether what's written is well-reasoned, proportionate, and adds anything to the discussion.

I think a more important standard is whether you would post the exact thing if you were posting under your full real name, rather than behind the selective anonymity of the internet.

Her comments reminded me of Barry Ritholtz's comment instructions on his financial blog The Big Picture.

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

Anyway, the Misty Copeland discussion has been interesting.

I was listening to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's The Current this morning. The topic of conversation was the vulgar confrontation by some young male bystanders of a Toronto television reporter Shauna Hunt. You can listen to the 22 minute podcast by following the prior link.

Here's a YouTube showing the incident: https://youtu.be/LKkAL1AEam8

One of the hecklers was fired from his job at Hydro One.

As part of the discussion, The Current discussed what right(s) a company has in terminating an employee for conduct outside of work.

The panelists are as listed below:

• Daniel A. Lublin is a workplace law expert and a partner at Whitten & Lublin.
• Kaveh Shahrooz is a lawyer who focuses on human rights issues and codes of conduct.
• Alicia Versteegh is the co-director of the Toronto chapter of Hollaback, an anti-street harassment movement.

Generally speaking, I don't intend to keep this thread alive. However, I thought today's CBC discussion is good because there was a lawyer who discussed workplace law.

Thank you Helene.

Thank you for responding Helene. So the best course of action is to just scan the column where it shows the last post?

I am just looking for a fast and efficient process to quickly scan for new content.

Problem Definition:

I want to be able to easily and quickly spot threads that are new or have new content since I was last here.

Background Information:

When I click View New Content, I most often see Sorry, no new content found. Yet, if I go to a thread that I saw earlier--for example, Misty Copeland in the Dancers forum--I view new content that has been added since my last visit.

Moreover, if I go to the main Forums page, I see some forums have a light blue coloring while others have a white coloring.

When I last visited Ballet Alert earlier today, I clicked the link at the bottom of the main Forums page that reads: Mark Read: Forums/Blogs/All.

Can someone, please, provide some guidance as to what I am doing wrong?

I enjoyed yesterday's performance of Alberta Ballet's Fumbling Towards Ecstasy. My first live ballet a few years ago was Fumbling Towards Ecstasy. This year's version, called Director's Cut, is slightly different with a slight change up in the songs.

For those in Calgary and Edmonton who are planning to see the performance, I highly recommend that you attend the pre-show chat with artistic director Jean Grand-Maître. JGM discusses the motivation behind the movements and how the ballet came into being. He talks about how he met Sarah McLachlan and how they collaborated to create this ballet. He also talks about what the music meant to Sarah and how he tried to incorporate those feelings into the dance. Hearing and learning of the artistic process made the ballet performance that much more enjoyable.

I also enjoyed his discussion of Sarah's reaction to the ballet.

Not having an artistic background, I found his whole discussion interesting. And, JGM is a good speaker who can tell an interesting story with ease.

The performance itself started at 7:30 pm, and the pre-show chat was from 6:30 pm to 7:00 pm.

Kevin H. Stecyk

Here's an article from Forbes on a similar theme: Dancer Wendy Whelan Discusses Her Passion For Collaboration And 'Butt Glue'.

At a recent symposium at the Fashion Institute of Technology in New York, held in conjunction with F.I.T.’s exhibition, “Dance and Fashion,” Whelan said, “My greatest joy in life is collaborating with people, I found this out by working with choreographers. That’s where my love lies. It comes in many different forms, I keep on seeking out someone I can build a relationship with.”

Whelan said Rodriguez—who has designed costumes for a ballet, “Fool’s Paradise,” by choreographer Christopher Wheeldon, creator of one of Whelan’s most famous ballets, “After the Rain”—“highlights your personal shape” and uses “fabric that moves together well, is comfortable on your skin. Those two talents make us feel amazing. He gets it.”

When I read about the Christian Louboutin inspired by ballet shoes, I wonder if they have red soles or shanks?

Thank you sandik for your response. If I recall correctly from the pre-show chat, David Nixon began out of necessity, too.

Thank you sandik and kbarber for your comments.

Is there anything that inspires a choreographer to be a costume designer? Is it that a choreographer imagines the ballet to come together in a certain manner and the costumes are an integral piece? Do some simply enjoy the artistic challenge?

Do choreographers who design get highly involved in the design process? Or, are they more likely to set the look and direction and have others complete the work? In others, would the roles of a choreographer who designs costumes differ significantly from a hired clothing / costume designer?

This past Thursday, I saw an encore presentation of the Bolshoi's The Pharaoh's Daughter at my local Cineplex theater in Calgary.

Although I saw it when it was released in Canada orginally, I enjoyed this encore presentation, too. Being relatively new to ballet, I find watching a ballet a bit like drinking from a fire hydrant--there is so much to watch and pay attention to. With this encore presentation, I already knew the storyline and had a vague feeling of what to expect next. Thus, I was able to devote more energy to watching the dancers' movements.

On a sad note, during one of the intermissions, I saw Katerina Novikova's interview of Sergei Filin. This interview took place prior to his attack where he had acid splashed in his eyes. What an unnecessary tragedy.

My reason for writing this message is that I seem to recall during the introduction to the ballet that the choreographer, Pierre Lacotte, was also responsible for the costumes. Am I correct?

At the pre-show chat at a recent performance by the Alberta Ballet The Three Musketeers, I learned that the choreographer, David Nixon, was also responsible for costume design.

Is it common for choreographers to both be responsible for costume design and choreography? Intuitively, I would expect that these two endeavors are quite different from one another.

Maybe Under Armour has decided that their main customer base for women are women who are interested in and participate in sports, not ballet. Bundchen's hiring is a little odd in this regard, but her husband Tom Brady has been a spokesman since 2010, so maybe they are going to do some ads as a couple. The couple that works out together can stay together and look like Tom and Gisele?

Under Armour is attempting increase its sales to all women, regardless of their participation or interest in ballet or a specific sport. I believe Kevin Plank, Under Armour's CEO, views the company as a lifestyle company, more than just a sportswear company.

Here are two articles for those interested:

1. Under Armour Goes After Lululemon With Gisele And 'Womanifesto' (Forbes)
2. Skin in the Game: Under Armour knows athletes. Can it sell to everyone else? (The New Yorker)

Disclosure: I own Under Armour shares.

Regarding Galliano, Vanity Fair published an article that examined his abuse / addiction to certain chemical concoctions. Here is the curtailed version:

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2013/06/john-galliano-interview-exclusive

Thank you for highlighting the Vanity Fair article. I am surprised that I missed it earlier.

I recall reading case studies, although different from the Galliano circumstances, about employers and employees drinking at off-site parties, and then bad things happening. Usually, the employer was held accountable.

As Helene mentioned, employers are coming to grips with social media and, probably too, on how other outside activities might affect an employer's reputation. I am sure that business, law, and ethics case studies are being now being written. This whole area is an interesting field of study.

I expect that we'll see more high profile mishaps that are recorded in some fashion.

My recent posts in this thread have been meant as a conversation starter. What is permissible and what isn't? Is it only work related conduct that matters, or does our any (or all) of our conduct matter? Has technology and social media made a difference? And, now that almost everyone carries a cell phone with a camera and can upload mishaps to a social site, has that changed our environment or behavior? These are bigger questions than I can answer.

I have always found topics of this sort interesting. That is, there seems to be changes afoot. What does it mean to us? I suspect in prior years, your private life was your private life. Now, we seem to be witnessing a blurring of private and work lives.

Unless there is something dramatic, I will let this topic go.

In a tangential and somewhat similar vein, John Galliano lost his court decision that he was unfairly dismissed.

John Galliano is a famous haute couture clothing designer. He made inappropriate remarks at a bar one night that cost him his job. Here's a New York Times article Dior Fires John Galliano After Bigotry Complaints. Today the website Fashionista published an article John Galliano Loses Unfair Dismissal Case Against Dior and His Namesake Label.

Howard Levitt wrote another article in the Financial Post Lessons from the Jian Ghomeshi case: ‘There is nowhere to hide’ where he discusses using social media.

I have always advised not to post anything on social media, at whatever age, that you would not like seen by a future employer. The cautionary tale of Ghomeshi is that that this caution must extend beyond what you post, extending to everything that you do which can be related by others or surreptitiously recorded.

Kathleen, I enjoyed our discussion, so thank you.

I am curious to see how the Ghomeshi issue plays itself out, though we might not ever learn the final outcome with all its details.

A high profile individual like Ghomeshi might well have the time, financial resources and support network necessary to pursue redress through the courts. He will also have the individual clout -- and, just as important, the dollars -- to keep his lawyers from taking control of the process: unless there is enough money, publicity, or prestige in it to make a lengthy and potentially fruitless court battle worth their while, a prudent law firm will encourage its client to settle, and quickly if at all possible. And, if the client doesn't have deep pockets, or if it looks as if the payout from a case taken on a contingency fee basis won't be enough to cover its expenses, the law firm won't be inclined to die on that hill either. (One of the most valuable services a good lawyer provides is telling you when it's time to stop.)

For an "at will" employee without Ghomeshi's profile, resources, and network, the going will be tough. In the US, "at will" employees -- i.e., those without an employment contract (either as an individual or as a union member) -- can be terminated for almost any reason or no reason at all, and the hurdles to mounting a successful wrongful termination action are many and onerous. Employees must demonstrate that they were terminated in violation of federal or state employment law, and that is often harder to do than it sounds. What might look like a clear-cut case of discrimination or retaliation to you or me can look -- or be made to look -- very different in a court of law.

I do think it depends on the situation, which is why I said it wasn't necessarily a disadvantage.

Kathleen, I agree with you far more than I disagree. Surprisingly, many/most lawyers are poor at judging outcomes. It's a hard thing to do, especially when one has a vested interest. However, I do agree that if the client lacks financial resources, the law firm will look out for itself first and limit its exposure. Furthermore, any experienced person, lawyer or layperson, knows, that when you go to trial, you're entering a crapshoot. And we also know that most, something like 90% or more, of all cases are settled prior to trial. So yes, there's a time to settle and move on.

With regard to your comments on "at will" employees, I agree. While I don't know the specifics of the Ghomeshi termination, most smart companies simply terminate with no reason given. Then the companies provide the mandated termination or severance package and everyone moves on.

Still, if I were going to fight a battle, I'd prefer to the one calling the shots. I would have to live the consequences, whether good or bad. Thus, I would want complete control of process from my side. Every intermediary is just more sand in the gears. And if I were not happy with the way my case was being handled, I wouldn't hesitate to switch key players in my team. Moreover, I would bone up on the applicable laws so that I could dance right along with my lawyers. With potential millions at stake, I would be extraordinarily motivated to learn and to learn fast.

Anyway, that's just me. Others might prefer a more passive approach. Seeing how quickly Ghomeshi mobilized his forces, however, he doesn't seem like the passive type either.

In the US at least, unionized employees would most likely seek redress for wrongful termination through their union's formal grievance process, which isn't necessarily a disadvantage even though it doesn't have the headline éclat of a $50 million lawsuit. (And - ahem - may not require the services of an attorney specializing in employment law, which is what Howard Levitt is.)

In my view, it would still be a disadvantage. It's an advantage in that a union would put up the costs and fight the fight. It's a disadvantage in that the employee has lost control of the process. A union would decide when enough is enough. And a union might even decide that the employee was in the wrong, even when the employee still might have a fighting chance. Moreover, I would expect that a union would take a bigger picture view of the situation. That is, this is just one fight or issue of many. Let's keep things in perspective. Whereas for the employee, especially in a termination case, this is the hill to die on--especially as there are no other hills.

In short, if I were ever to launch this severe of an action where my livelihood and reputation were at stake, I would want as much control as possible. And, you're right, a union would likely never go for an eye-catching fifty million dollars lawsuit. Extreme numbers become meaningless.

I've heard his radio show several times and thought he was an effective interviewer -- it does seem that he's being punished for personal choices. I understand the labor law aspects of the situation, but it does seem unfair.

I am not sure what you've read so far. If it is just his Facebook account, then you must remember that you are receiving his side of the story.

There have been serious allegations mentioned in Jezebel, a woman's online site, and in two New York Times articles Jian Ghomeshi, CBC Radio Host, Is Fired in Sex Case and What Jian Ghomeshi’s Accusers Were Afraid Of. Again for emphasis, these allegations have not been proven in a court of law.

From the first mentioned New York Times article we learn that:

On Monday, lawyers for Mr. Ghomeshi filed a lawsuit against the government-owned CBC claiming breach of confidence, bad faith, and defamation, and seeking 55 million Canadian dollars, or $49 million. He has also retained a crisis management firm favored by politicians.

So they have sidestepped the constructive or wrongful dismissal lawsuit referenced by the Financial Post.

Anyway, this Ghomeshi stuff, while interesting, is deviating away from ballet. I had mentioned it initially when it had to do with behavior and wrongful dismissal. The link being that employees need to watch their conduct, which would likely include online postings, because their behavior can affect their employment, even when they are on off-hours and especially when they help represent the company.

This past weekend, Jian Ghomeshi was dismissed from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation under rather unfortunate circumstances.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/jian-ghomeshi-host-of-q-no-longer-with-cbc-1.2813670

"The CBC is saddened to announce its relationship with Jian Ghomeshi has come to an end. This decision was not made without serious deliberation and careful consideration. Jian has made an immense contribution to the CBC and we wish him well," the network said in a statement.

If you search the internet or read Ghomeshi's Facebook account (linked to save you the effort), you'll learn that there are some rather unsavoury allegations about his personal life. For the purposes of this post, we need not go there. But what is interesting are the legal considerations. CBC fired Ghomeshi, and Ghomeshi has hired a PR firm and a law firm to protect his reputation and sue CBC.

I enjoyed Howard Levitt's article in the Financial Post Jian Ghomeshi’s CBC lawsuit is hopeless — even if he’s telling the truth.

Quite apart from the fact that his actual damages likely do not exceed 2% of that figure, unionized bargaining-unit employees (as CBC broadcasters are) can’t sue in court for wrongful dismissal. This suit will almost certainly be quickly struck down by the courts without Ghomeshi recovering a penny.

...

In this era of obsession with privacy, there is actually less privacy than ever. Every employee should assume that everything he or she does, inside work and outside, public or private, could end up being revealed to an employer. Any other assumption is foolhardy.

...

It is interesting that Ghomeshi is issuing a $50-million claim against CBC, while simultaneously declaring his historic loyalty to and love for it. The reality is, as he must also know, that suit will go nowhere. As a unionized employee, he cannot sue the CBC in court but is stuck with having to grieve through the arbitration process.

...

Arbitrators (and judges) have increasingly resisted reinstating employees who, in the public mind, represent the employer and its goodwill, including radio and television hosts. It is one thing to force a factory to rehire an assembly-line worker. But arbitrators are more loath to force a television station to put someone on the air as its representative who no longer reflects its style, approach or desired image.

So my two takeaways from this article are as follows: one, unionized employees may be at a disadvantage when arguing constructive or wrongful dismissal; and two, the lines between private and public conduct have blurred, especially for those whose face or personality represents the company.

Thus, if an employee's conduct disparages a company's reputation, the employee is not in a good spot.

Yes, though, I seem to recall she was alternating with another dancer Akiko Ishii. I believe I saw Akiko Ishii in the lead role. The performance was last March.

I usually make a mental note to see which role she is dancing.