nanushka

What does it "expose," exactly? Certainly it's long been known that ABT is understaffed when it comes to coaches. I don't think it's all that uncommon for dancers (and not only at ABT) to pay for supplemental coaching of a variety of sorts, and that of course is dependent on an individual's financial resources (unfair as that may seem). This part at least doesn't seem surprising to me, in the context of a performing arts organization: ...and in fact seems to demonstrate healthy communication. I'm not a fan of McKenzie, but I didn't find anything in the article to be particularly surprising or unsettling. (That said, I imagine there are truths about his leadership not revealed in the article that would make me feel surprised or unsettled.) *shrug* That's show business.

A sneak preview of Murphy’s return and Forster’s debut (click on right arrow for two videos):

You are of course entitled to an opinion. I'm not sure I can easily explain (even to myself) why your statement of it left me uncomfortable. It wasn't the terminology, with which I'm familiar. In any case, there are many reasons why Waterbury could be acting in a way that is or seems immature — not all of which are physical. Quite likely it's multidetermined.

I’m reading this and it seems like you’re diagnosing this woman without ever having met her (I assume) and it makes me very uncomfortable. Is this professionally appropriate, I wonder? As a fellow educator I would never presume to publicly hypothesize on the frontal lobes (or, citing my professional status, to otherwise diagnose specific somatic or psychological causes for behavior) of students I know well, much less those of people I’ve never met.

Yes thank for clarifying. I missed your point at first but now I see, and agree.

Of course. He may not be highly skilled, but he’s a professional.

Heads up, there are some IG stories up now @abtofficial with rehearsal clips of the new ballet.

I don’t think this has been made public before: ”She [Waterbury] also said her initial settlement offer to the School of American Ballet and New York City Ballet was to just pay her legal fees and publicly apologize.“ Of course it’s only her word, but I’ve read many comments suggesting (critically) that Waterbury is in it for the money.

Oh nice! I didn’t know this had made it onto YouTube!

Well, it's the 19th century so...the redeeming power of a woman's love? (Even more powerful if it's a love sandwich!) I can completely understand how that may no longer feel like a convincing explanation, though!

@sandik 's explanations are very detailed and super helpful. If you should want to take an even deeper dive into examining all sorts of jumps, there are these two videos by Suki Schorer of SAB: and

This rings very true to me. I've often seen/heard criticisms of certain Giselles as, in essence, not delicate or fragile enough for the role, but I've always thought that a dancer with the qualities you mention can fit it quite well. I didn't see the performance, but I've been very interested to read all the reports on here. I hope it's released on DVD.

Copyright laws sound like more of a legal/pragmatic concern than a moral/aesthetic one.

There may not be a reliable record of the steps, but I believe there are reliable records of some aspects of the work (e.g. the ordering of musical numbers or the plot content of the denouement), and those aspects are frequently altered. I understood you to be objecting, on moral grounds, to the broader range of possible alterations of Bugaku, not just alteration of the steps/choreography. Sorry if I misunderstood.

Sorry I didn’t mean to suggest anything of the sort, I was simply referencing that video as an example of how a ballet continues to exist as an enduring work of art in only a very limited sense when it’s not being produced. “Leave it alone” means one thing with a sculpture or painting (it still sits there, being itself) but something very different with a work in the performing arts. (I should have clarified that by “ceases to exist” I didn’t necessarily mean “for good.” Of course video can play a role in restaging.) I’m not sure why altering Bugaku is a moral issue in a way that altering, say, Swan Lake might not be. (Certainly it’s more of a legal issue, but that’s quite different.)

The entire history of ballet is one of alteration. The performing arts are fundamentally different from sculpture or painting in that there is not in fact a concrete and stable “work of art.” Ballets need to be staged, to be produced. “Don’t do it” means, in the performing arts, that the work essentially ceases to exist, except in in the abstract, in memory or in technological reproduction (e.g. the existing video with McBride and Bonnefoux).

My point wasn't about the Bugaku makeup; it was that cultural stereotypes embodied and performed by a member of the culture being stereotyped are still just that — cultural stereotypes. Blackface was just an analogy.

If humor and offensiveness were mutually exclusive, a good number of comics would be out of business. Context matters. There's a big difference between pointing fingers to make fun of ballet's occasional cultural offensiveness and pointing fingers to take part in it. I share @l'histoire 's mystification at the idea that an Asian company performing Bugaku would eliminate the problem. Picture for a moment a black person wearing blackface makeup, with all its ridiculous and offensive exaggerations and dehumanizing elements. It'd still be blackface. (FWIW, I'm not intending to conflate Bugaku and blackface.) I say this as someone who would love to see Bugaku maintained, in at least some form and some context, despite its inherently problematic nature. I just don't think it'd be possible to do so without an acknowledgment that it is problematic; trying to sidestep the issue would be counter-productive and indeed impossible.

Completely agree. This is why the argument presented in the Ballet Conrad video responding to Copeland (posted on this thread, p. 18, back in December) seemed like total nonsense to me. He seemed to demonstrate a serious lack of understanding of what racism even is or how it works.

I agree this is quite possible — maybe even likely. The race problem in ballet lies far more in the flaws of institutions and those holding power than in 14 year olds, though, which is part of why I think Copeland’s critique would have been far more appropriately directed at the former than the latter.

Was that true of all of them? I’d read it about Moyna and Zulma but not the full corps. (Hadn’t read anything to the contrary though, so just curious.)

Yes, sorry, just speaking in broad strokes, and thinking most of the more intense/obvious darkening. Seems like there may be a spectrum of what’s deemed “appropriate” for different characters.

That movie never hit my radar @On Pointe, thanks for the link. That makeup is crazy! I’ll definitely check it out. I wonder if one reason the Bayadère leads aren’t typically darkened is because it is in a way so dehumanizing (as done in ballet/stage makeup, especially), as I think you mentioned a few times before — and maybe that feels (to those who advocate the use of darkening makeup) more befitting for an unnamed slave or servant character than for a dramatic lead. (They wouldn’t probably consciously think or agree it was dehumanizing, but the effect is so powerful I imagine they must feel it.)

That’s not at all the same thing as “false equivalence.” It seems everyone who’s posted is pretty much in agreement on the topic of blackface, so perhaps that’s why it hasn’t been addressed at length. Certainly I personally would be eager to hear any fresh insights on the topic. I think we can walk and chew gum both.

Yeah I don't think that analogy quite works because in this case it wouldn't be a recipient responding, nor to stalkers. I agree that even a simple statement like that would be a good move.