nanushka

I'm disappointed that in order to see Forster's Albrecht I'll have to see Murphy's Giselle again; I was hoping he'd continue to be paired with Shevchenko.

Brandt/Cornejo/Hurlin and Trenary/Royal/Fang should be exciting.

The Atlantic reports on "an array of new polls" showing that "the vaccinated, across party lines, have kind of had it with the unvaccinated":

Quote

These new results, shared exclusively with The Atlantic by several pollsters, reveal that significant majorities of people who have been vaccinated support vaccine mandates for health workers, government employees, college students, and airline travelers—even, in some surveys, for all Americans or all private-sector workers. Most of the vaccinated respondents also say that entry to entertainment and sporting arenas should require proof of vaccination, and half say the same about restaurants.

13 minutes ago, ECat said:

Yes you are correct!  Thank you for pointing that out.  Lauren King joined the corps in 2004, Pazcoguin in 2003, and Smith in 2006!

Right, but it was over 8 years ago (Feb 2013) that King and Pazcoguin were promoted to soloist. 

37 minutes ago, On Pointe said:

Well Martins is a white European male,  and he was the boss,   so mimicking (or mocking) his accent could be considered punching up.  …

I haven't decided to buy the book yet,  but I hate the cover.  Pazcoguin looks like a drunk sitting on a transparent toilet,  not an artist offering insight to her creative process,  which is my main motivation for reading books by performers.  Gossip gets old faster than slang.

Interestingly, her Martins voice sounds (to me) not at all convincing or even successfully mocking. She’s a very good reader but doesn’t seem to have a voice for impressions.

I also don’t much like the cover, though it fits the persona in its “rogue” way.

The book doesn’t seem too gossipy so far. (I’m only a quarter through.) There’s enough substance throughout to keep me, at least, engaged.

12 hours ago, dirac said:

I suppose foul language and general coarseness of expression does qualify as "conversational style" these days. I found the Elle excerpt difficult to get through and it's not long.  I will withhold judgment until I get hold of the book and come to it with an open mind, but I sure hope the whole thing doesn't read like that.

This put me off also. I'm not saying they should gush about how much they love it, or not be frank about the challenges involved, but at least show some respect and/or take a minute to explain its quality to the reader.  At least NYCB's seasonal cash cow is a masterpiece, not something many other companies can say.

I suppose it's possible she just doesn't agree with that assessment of Nutcracker as a masterpiece, or just doesn't experience it in that way. She does make a point early on of praising certain specific works (e.g. a highly appreciative description of Concerto Barocco, in the context of discussing the challenges of corps dancing), so she's apparently not immune to their pleasures.

Listening to the book, I've been wondering if the frequent profanity comes across differently in print. On audio, it contributes to conversational voice, though it does at times seem a bit lazy or uninventive. I don't have a particular problem with it, though: language is language. (I don't view profanity as any more "foul" than any other language — except, perhaps, when it involves interpersonal slurs.)

Again, I guess it's a matter of what one turns to particular books hoping to find. For me, the primary appeal of a dancer memoir is not in its prose style; if the prose gives pleasure, that's a bonus. I'm reading the book for the candid insights about a dancer's experience.

6 minutes ago, abatt said:

The Broadway League has announced that anyone attending any Broadway show must provide proof of vaccination. Mayor DeBlasio is considering whether the health department will mandate proof of vaccination for entry into restaurants and bars.

 

It's time for NYCB to step up and impose a vaccination requirement, in my opinion.

I agree. And it’s well past time for the unvaccinated to start carrying more of the burden of the consequences of their choices, which have brought us to this point. New variants will continue to emerge as long as there isn’t a larger proportion of the population vaccinated.

5 minutes ago, Helene said:

I guess I've seen too many ballet performances with kids where the applause is disproportionate to their technical quality.  Of course, a lot of audience members are the family and friends of child performers -- can be in A Midsummer Night's Dream or "Hours" in Coppelia or the kids in Harlequinade as well -- and part of the thrill is seeing and cheering your own.  I haven't seen that much Broadway, but, where I have, and in other professional theater, the kid performers are a lot more skilled than their ballet counterparts until most dancers have a are in their mid-teens and training pre-professionally.

Yes, I adored the Disney+ show On Pointe but it’s true that, at least to my sense, the duo who played the child leads were not Broadway quality for their age. Their training had not primarily prepared them for acting/miming roles.

Yeah, I read dancers’ memoirs for candid reflections on a dancer’s life experience. If that includes some complaints about experiences that, from an audience member’s very different perspective, I cherish — well, I’m not going to get annoyed. That’s part of the deal. It’s showbiz.

”It’s their job.” Well, I complain about my job too.

12 minutes ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

Yes. If there's anything that argues for a mask mandate, it's this. 

To be clear, I don't think it's an argument against vaccines. 

Right, because vaccinated people are less likely to have those spreadable infections in the first place.

I’d be all in favor of a mask mandate even if they don’t do much to enforce it. (I wouldn’t want enforcement to disrupt performances, for instance.) In a non-socially distanced theater it doesn’t seem like a bad idea; I personally don’t mind wearing a mask, and have found ones that are comfortable; and a mandate would at least establish a baseline social norm. Again, compared to no intermissions, it would at least make reasonable sense (to me).

9 minutes ago, abatt said:

I don't think that would accomplish the goal of enhancing safety.  It is the un-vaccinated who pose significant  danger of spreading the disease. 

In terms of public policy, though, the goal is not typically to wholly eliminate risk (or, conversely, to ensure absolute safety); the goal is to, within reason, minimize risk. A vaccine mandate for those over 12 would be a definite step in that direction — more clearly than, for instance, not having intermissions.

I purchased the audio book and am a few chapters in, enjoying it so far. Pazcoguin narrates it herself and has a nice voice for it. I look forward to getting further in during the coming days.

5 minutes ago, Susu_nyc said:

Hello.  I am a subscriber, but am not seeing an option for early access single tickets online.  Is everyone else clicking on the performance date and seeing ticket availability?

You should have gotten an email on Monday. (Mine arrived a little after noon and showed up in my Gmail "Promotions" folder.) There's a link there that will take you to the ordering pages; you'll also need to make sure you're signed in on their site.

It's possible that just logging in will be enough, without the link. And phone orders can be placed at 212-496-0600.

And Shevchenko was cast as Giselle for the 2020 Met season, wasn’t she? With all the newly promoted principals, I hope they’ll cast broadly for this run.

I was really hoping they'd do Giselle! So happy we don't have to wait until May to see a good old-fashioned ABT full-length, and it will be great to see one in that theater!

9 minutes ago, miliosr said:

The danger is that they achieve "negative crossover": people who have been loyal to the entity known as 'Pennsylvania Ballet' for decades are put off by the name change while "Philadelphia Ballet" does not attract a new, numerically significant audience.

How many people "loyal to the entity...for decades" are likely to be sufficiently "put off" by the change that they drop that loyalty? (By no longer donating? Sure, maybe a few, I guess. By no longer attending? Even fewer, I think.)

Just now, Drew said:

I didn't want to seem to be ignoring your question, but I'm afraid I don't know the specifics. I just know that there is nothing on the face of it implausible about a principal dancer wanting a role danced by soloist esp. in a company in which soloists dance major roles all the time.

Not at all, thanks! You mentioned it was a premiere, so I was just curious if you knew which.

I completely agree there's nothing implausible about the details in (what we currently have of) Pazcoguin's account.

35 minutes ago, Balletwannabe said:

If you're vaccinated though and most of the audience is (which is highly likely with a ballet audience that tends to be older) The risk is extremely low.  There's just no sense in worrying about this, because first off you can't do anything about it, and second it's bad for your immune system to be stressed out.  That's scientifically based, stress is terrible for our bodies. And that's what I see so many people doing to themselves- stressing over who may or may not be vaccinated when they have no control over that.  And then you get a lot of people worried about it and everyone feeds off of each other, and that's what we have, a collective stressed out, traumatized (from the isolation and having to now go back to crowds) group of citizens.

There are apparently policy tradeoffs, though. I think it's reasonable to say (as I do) that I wish companies such as NYCB would require audience members to be vaccinated (with the exception of children who can't be), and then let us have regular intermissions, etc. so we can enjoy performances more like we used to.

One can express an opinion about policy matters without getting stressed out about it.

The very sad fact of the matter is we are still quite needlessly not past this pandemic because far too many people have chosen not to “follow the science” and get vaccinated — not just for themselves, but for the benefit of all.

1 hour ago, Drew said:

One of the disagreeing others here...Soloists get cast as leads and this was a premier (and thus likely to get reviewed). Presumably a lead was being created on Pazoquin...I don’t actually have a strong opinion on the value or truthfulness of this book which hasn’t come out yet and I don’t think one dancer angling for another’s role in these circumstances (however tactless or unkind) counts as more than a venial sin. But I certainly found the story credible enough whatever the ranks involved...

Out of curiosity, what was the work and role she was rehearsing? I'm not aware of the circumstances of her injury, and I don't think the article specifies.

14 hours ago, On Pointe said:

I'm not saying that Georgina Pazcoguin should have done any of those things.

Aren't you?

On 7/14/2021 at 8:49 PM, On Pointe said:

I must say,  Pazcoguin's allegation about Ramasar touching her inappropriately doesn't sound credible.  Once maybe,  but every day for years?  She should have kicked him in the balls the first time, or at least have filed a complaint with management and refused to be in his vicinity.

We don't know what she did or did not do. We haven't read the full account yet. We don't even know what she thought or felt about Ramasar's alleged behavior. This is all we know:

Quote

Some of the experiences Pazcoguin relates are disturbing, others are just plain weird. She writes that for years, Ramasar would greet her in class “by sidling up close, whispering, ‘You look fine today,’ eyes locked on my chest, and then he’d zero in on the goal at hand by — surprise! — tweaking my nipples.” (In an email, Ramasar said “I flatly deny this allegation”; Martins didn’t respond to requests for comment.)

We do know, from this, that Pazcoguin writes about the experiences in the book and that Kourlas thinks them either "disturbing" or "just plain weird" or possibly both. That's about it.

(It never says "every day"; presumably this would have happened only on some or all of the occasions when Ramasar personally greeted her in class.)

Maybe Pazcoguin wasn't bothered enough by the experiences to think they needed reporting; maybe now, given what else has been alleged about Ramasar, she thinks they're relevant to talk about, since they potentially fill out a larger pattern of behavior. On the other hand, maybe she felt victimized and traumatized all along. We don't know.

1 hour ago, Rock said:

I went back to the NYT article to make sure I read it right. Yup, "for years" greeting her in class Ramarsar was "tweaking my nipples." In company class. In front of oh easily 40-50 other people. No one batted an eyelash. Am I the only one who has trouble with that? Those aren't little girls. Those are professional women. I don't believe for a minute plenty of them wouldn't have said something - to GP, to Amar, to the AD and the ED.

“For years” doesn’t mean every day. Maybe in corners, on the sidelines, with not many people seeing, or noticing, or remarking, especially if the recipient doesn’t visibly seem upset. It’s so easy to imagine this playing out. We’ve gotten very little of the story.

Rereading the story, be sure to note which words are Pazcoguin’s and which are Kourlas’s.

Do we know that no one said anything to any of those people you mention?

Especially in today’s world, I think it’s always worth thinking carefully about what one really knows and how. (And why.)

19 minutes ago, On Pointe said:

One would think this matter would have come up at the height of the public discussion of the Finlay-Waterbury suit,  especially since there seemed to be a concerted effort in the media to blame it all on Ramasar.  (All the more because GP seems to have the ear of Gia Kourlas at the NY Times.)  This supposedly happened in company class,  where dozens of people must have seen it at some time over the years.

Right. And now she's publishing an account of it in a book she's written. Which may be one reason why she didn't bring it up then, and why she wouldn't now claim it in print if there weren't at least a few company members who are willing to back her up. We haven't seen whether that's the case yet. So I don't think there's a very strong basis now for saying it's a false or non-credible claim.

Mightn't this be her way of putting him in his place? Just one possible interpretation. We haven't even read the book yet. I think it’s unwise to pass judgment at this early point.

"She didn't do what I would have done."

"She didn't do what women should do."

"She didn't do X in situation A, even though she did Y in situation B."

Statements such as these do not, in my opinion, support a claim that an allegation is untrue or not credible. And all suggest a lack of understanding of how many victims react to such situations.

ETA:

I can easily imagine a young female dancer experiencing this — from an older, male, senior company member — and being simply stunned. It happens again, and there's more anger this time, but also perhaps shame (e.g. at not having prevented it), a desire to fit in, a fear of being viewed as problematic, a fear of consequences. It happens a few more times, and by that point it feels almost impossible to say something. ("She should have said something earlier.")

It is very easy for me to imagine a young dancer in this situation not thinking, "I should go to management" or "I should bring charges through my union."

11 hours ago, On Pointe said:

I must say,  Pazcoguin's allegation about Ramasar touching her inappropriately doesn't sound credible.  Once maybe,  but every day for years?  She should have kicked him in the balls the first time,  or at least have filed a complaint with management and refused to be in his vicinity.

Self-perception is odd.  I always thought of GP as quite thin,  and I didn't know she was half-Asian until she started working with Phil Chan.  The book sounds like a good read,  however some might say that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

What is the "glass house" in which Pazcoguin resides?

"Management" was Peter Martins, of whom the article states, "she refers to him as her psychological abuser."

She may well have reported Ramasar's behavior; after all, the article also states that Martins was asked for comment about the incidents.

In any case, "why didn't she say something earlier?" and "why didn't she stop it?" are very common reactions to women reporting cases of sexual assault or abuse, and there are often understandable reasons why.

It doesn't seem as if the issue of her thighs was only a matter of "self-perception":

Quote

She braced herself for fat-shaming (it always came down to her thighs) or being told that she was not fully committed. But the encounter turned out differently: Martins promoted her to soloist, the rank she still holds.

I think it sounds, at least generally, less provincial and less regional. As @Californiasuggests, think of the names of prominent US city-named ballet companies, orchestras, opera companies, museums, etc. compared with those named by state.

Thanks for explaining further, @On Pointe. "Agenda" had thrown me, suggesting something more consciously planned. What you describe makes sense in its way, but I'd want to know more about the situation (the company, its roster, audience, administration, plans for Edwards, Edwards' dancing) than what I've picked up from casually following the story here.