nanushka

Thanks so much, Helene. I find that all very interesting.

...as it is in many professional workplaces. Unfortunately, I have some doubts about how generally effective such programs are, at least when compared with mentorships that arise more organically among colleagues. (And I say that as one who had a very positive experience in one such program.) But, in general, better than nothing, at least.

I don’t mind at all seeing the “tricks.” I just wish they were done with more refinement.

Yes, that explanation definitely makes sense and seems a likely one.

Another that comes to mind: There are likely more people who are able to attend evenings but not able to attend Wednesday matinees than there are people who are able to attend Wednesday matinees but not able to attend evenings. (The former are not more deserving, just more numerous, I'd guess. And there are some people who are able to attend both.) Dancers have followings (many who post on here are among them), which both the dancers and the company have an interest (for various reasons) in cultivating and satisfying. Casting a dancer in the Wednesday matinee slot makes it somewhat more difficult to do either.

Just curious, what have you observed? (I'd grant that Saturday matinees are not the same as Wednesday matinees and that different companies may well have different patterns and/or messages. A Saturday matinee at NYCB, for instance, feels to me very different from a Wednesday matinee at ABT.)

I don't necessarily think it is. But I can imagine reasons for thinking it is that would not involve thinking the audience is less deserving, one of which I explained above.

Yes, please! (Not wishing for the latter, of course, just hoping the former is the result if so!)

I don't disagree with your facts or even necessarily with your perception. I was merely explaining what I think is most often intended when people suggest that a Wednesday matinee casting (without accompanying evening casting, as canbelto notes) is a discredit to a particular dancer — i.e. not that a matinee audience is less deserving of top-notch casting.

Yes, I don't get a sense that those on here who've complained (other than just personally, because they can't attend the performance) about dancer X or dancer Y getting assigned the Wednesday matinee slot are suggesting anything negative about the audiences at those performances — just that, in the context of this particular company's casting tendencies, it may seem to send a certain message to the dancer and to the public about how that dancer is viewed by the company's administration.

To me it would seem ill-advised for a dancer to make any public statement much different from that one.

The thing is, while Corella had that dynamo side, I feel like he was much more than that. Admittedly, I didn't start following ABT until near the end of his career there, so I only saw him live a handful of times. But the impression I got, even in those last years, was that he was much more of an all-around high-quality dancer. If these are "mini-Angels," they seem modeled on a caricature.

Definitely. I would not have wondered why the company might have a use for him if 2015 had been 2018. Simkin's decampment opens things up considerably for a dancer like Cirio.

Yes, that paternal dynamic seems very much a part of the role, in many cases. I got that sense quite strongly from the social media posts in support of Martins by NYCB dancers.

Re: Cirio, I remember thinking, "What does the company need him for?" (As it turns out, not much. He doesn't get cast much in leading roles, as noted above.) If they'd brought in a tall male principal or senior soloist, sure, that would have made sense to me. There's been a need for that for quite some time. But then for ABT to start making sense now would itself come as a surprise.

Yes, it was with Reyes — a surprise debut. That was the year before, 2014. He talked about learning it in an interview with Gia Kourlas in Time Out:

Yes, good point. With those two being brought in as shorter male principal and soon-to-be-principal in 2015, just as Gorak was really looking like he might be on the way up (even his partnering had gotten a bit better at that time), the latter was shuffled aside, likely for good. He probably should have seen the writing on the wall and gone elsewhere.

I completely agree it wasn't a 1-to-1 tradeoff, in terms of casting. But I think when Cirio was brought in as a soon-to-be-principal (it was basically a done deal, I think, from his hiring), it killed Gorak's chances of getting that promotion anytime soon and basically pushed him to the sidelines. He's been there ever since, and the effects on his dancing have been palpable. (Not that that's not at least partly his own fault; you have to make what you can of the opportunities you have, of course.)

This description matches what I've seen as well, though I suspect these qualities were at least as much an effect as a cause. Regardless, it's quite disappointing. I had the impression, in those earlier years, of seeing the start of a potentially exciting career. (Admittedly, he had some problems to work through — partnering foremost among them.)

My opinion: among other things, Jeffrey Cirio happened.

These are the two mysteries I feel I will never solve. I can imagine a reason (though I'd disagree) for his (differing) treatments of Lane, Abrera, Copeland, Part, etc. But I cannot understand why, apparently, in his eyes, these two can walk on water.

Here is the Met's complete statement:

The Times reports on the latest developments in the Levine case:

Ugh. Just reading this I'm getting angry and anxious, imagining being in your position. One or two of those things would drive me nuts — I can't imagine them all! I find it impossible to ignore such disruptions and, as you say, be transported by a performance. (That's perhaps a fault of mine.) I'm grateful to be living in a historical era (unlike, for instance, the nineteenth century) and attending performances in a cultural market (NYC, mostly) where silent attentiveness is the (more or less enforced) norm. I just hope things don't change! Re: some comments above about Sterling Baca. My impression has been that some NYC/ABT fans sentimentalize him a bit as "the great taller male principal hope who might have been"—and I do agree with them that he had a good deal of potential and might have become that. I haven't seen him dance since he went to PAB, but his frequent IG videos often leave me thinking he still needs more refinement. Perhaps he'd have developed more of that if he'd stayed and had to work harder for a possible principal position at ABT.

Yes, in the past, reports on here have suggested that a lot depends on which ticket agent you talk to or happen to get at the window. Adherence to the policies, whatever they are, has not been very consistent.