nanushka

It’s great news, I agree. I don’t think this means it’s at all likely that large theaters in NYC could be hosting performing arts companies ready to perform in September, though.

My point is that it’s not “excessive” to think otherwise, as was suggested above. One can of course hope for whatever one thinks is reasonable to hope for.

He said by January. Companies will need to reconvene for rehearsals and getting back into performance shape before they can actually perform.

The cases are declining because we’ve all been staying home. Until there is widespread testing and contact tracing, large public gatherings will likely not be feasible (unless a quite effective treatment is developed). So yes, I think they do anticipate just that.

Thanks for posting that. The more recent complete recording (from Paris, with Mearns) is also well worth seeking out. And here is a quite different version by Lavrovsky, with Maximova:

But of course no use of the future tense these days can really be read without an implied "we hope."

The same introduction precedes other videos (e.g. operas) from the Mariinsky, which may be why it does not reference the specific genre of performance.

It also at least used to be the case that if you googled the article title ("Bolshoi in the kitchen: Russian ballet is also working from home during lockdown") and accessed it from there, that would sometimes work as a paywall workaround. (I remember this specifically with the Times, not sure about WaPo).

True, but that's also true of virtually any source of knowledge transmission, not only video, and not only when the subject is dance. No single source of knowledge — primary, secondary or tertiary — should be assumed to be infallible. Knowledge is always a work in progress, subject not only to expansion but revision.

There’s a something different about a live-streamed performance, though. And there’s something different about paying a modest amount to help ensure the survival of a local arts organization one values at a time of dire need.

I don’t think any of that really matters terribly much if one is viewing dance recordings (as I, personally, tend to) primarily as tools for gaining knowledge (of a piece, of its forms and structures, of its design elements, etc.), or as opportunities to experience at least some portion of the essence of certain performances I haven't been able to see live — i.e. as imperfect representations, rather than as aesthetic objects in themselves. The imperfections of dance on video also point to why the medium is not a replacement for live dance (as some potential distributors would seem to fear), but essential for audience building and as a spur to viewing live dance, particularly in the current era. In that way, too, I view the medium instrumentally.

I completely agree. For me, watching recordings is a necessary complement to attending live performances, and being able to see recordings allows me to appreciate the live performances so much more fully. I like to know a piece as well as I can when I see it live. (I completely understand that some others will feel quite differently about that.)

I hear you, @pherank! I wish they would too.

Yeah, not the same thing really at all! I don't think Looseleaf should be making them sound like they're keeping up with the trend when they're really not. The unions can either compromise or face possible ruin of the organizations (especially ABT, by far the more vulnerable). It infuriates me that the former seems like such an unlikely choice for them to make.

ABT and NYCB are offering free streaming performances?

So loved reading this.

Leonid Sarafanov is another. Check out his crop top: I don't get a sense that the old stereotype of Russian ballet machismo is felt to be quite so necessary anymore. (There are of course those like Polunin who remain, but there's more room for variety now, it seems.)

Certainly — and just clarifying that I did not write what was quoted. I didn't recall how specific the company had been in those announcements (i.e. in terms of the details of the conduct they were responding to). I thought I remembered them being at least a little vague, but it's been awhile and I definitely may be wrong on that.

Have the facts of the case been made public? We know the company suspended them and then fired them; we know the arbitrator ruled the firing was unjust but upheld the suspension. Presumably there’s a reason for the latter, but I don’t believe we know what it is.

Thanks much! Here is the relevant passage: I don't see anything to suggest this is the reason why management would be concerned about the dancers presenting as insufficiently masculine in their day-to-day lives. Johnsey doesn't allege that he was harassed and discriminated against (by management) for public displays of affection with other men or for going out in drag. The concerns expressed here sound like they're coming from a very different place from what Johnsey (and now at least one other) has described as his treatment. And certainly this doesn't give any credence to the idea that the Trocks' management has any justifiable interest in how Johnsey acted and dressed in his daily life.

If it’s not too much trouble could you link to the article? I’m curious to read it and can’t tell which it might be (one of the ones under “News” I’m guessing?).

Thanks for the explanation. Johnsey himself certainly doesn't seem to have viewed those factors as being central to his troubles, but your hypothesis doesn't strike me as being out of the realm of possibility. Also, the two explanations — yours and Johnsey's — are of course not mutually exclusive.

Thank you for clarifying. This (above) is the part that confuses me, then. What is your basis for asserting this? Is it something Johnsey has said? something representatives of the company have said? something you've witnessed in performances or elsewhere? Because this (as far as I know) isn't the reason Johnsey has given for his fallout with the company; quite the opposite, as I got the impression that he loved his work and was very good at it. (Of course I wouldn't suggest we should take his word as the sole, complete truth.) So where does your idea about this particular "clash" come from? Because very much in line with @Helene's comments above, I don't see a clash there at all — particularly in light of the Trocks' repertoire and the particular ways in which they achieve their drag comedy. I think someone like Johnsey, who took being a ballerina very seriously, actually fits in quite perfectly.

But what your comments here have been suggesting — and I think it's important to articulate it, and please tell me if I am incorrect in my summary — is that Johnsey offstage was too feminine, insufficiently butch, not manly enough, too womanish despite his biological maleness, to be a successful drag performer.

Drag is gender fluidity. By definition. Drag is the performance of a performance. And yet again I ask: What evidence is there that Johnsey’s performances were not considered sufficiently comic? What history is there at all of company dissatisfaction with his performances? As you, @On Pointe, wrote: