Pique Arabesque

I have to admit I am not as knowledgeable as yourself Natalia and many others on BA about the qualifications for promotions, so I am curious if these are merit based as what I have seen with some competitions. Since several of the recent promotions, other than Stella's, seems a bit odd to me. Just based on what I have seen and read, IMO, one or two of the recent moves are a bit sooner than I would have thought, just based on experience. With one or two well presented and danced roles/parts IMO doesn't warrant the moves. Does height or need come into place for considerations? Then again perhaps this will give opportunities to further coaching and hopefully improvements, however, there are a few left behind whom would have done likewise as well if they were given the same opportunity.

It depends on the company. NYCB tends to push talented corps members, giving them principal roles and a lot of responsibility right off the bat (Finlay, Mearns, etc). Their rep is also huge, and they also perform a number of mixed bills.

At ABT, the process is usually more gradual. Because of all their full-length story ballets, dancers usually work their way up through the corps/soloist roles in these ballets before receiving a principal role. Sometimes, an AD only needs to see 1-2 successful principal roles in order to determine that all promotion is in order.

All I have ever tried to say about Copeland is that I have seen her dance many, many times as a soloist. For me she is nothing special as a dancer. Most of the time she gets the job done. She doesn't have a virtuoso technique, she is not deeply musical, she does not offer a layered performance in dramatic roles, she does not bring a unique imagination to any roles. No one does all of these things but a principal dancer has to have some of these things. To me Copeland has none. Perhaps KM sees more in her than I do. Perhaps he sees potential that I don't see in a dancer who is in her 30's.

KM has cited her musicality as one of her most appealing attributes. He obviously sees something that you do not. However, there is nothing wrong with not liking Copeland, but there are people (not necessarily you) who are acting as if her promotion is the beginning of the end for ABT, which is hyperbolic. Regardless, it's a done deal.

I am deeply insulted by the insinuation that when I watch Copeland, the fact that her skin is darker than most of the other woman in the company influences my judgement.

You should not feel personally offended. Really, this issue is bigger than the both of us. I feel like most white fans wouldn't have an issue with a black dancer - given that she has a typical ballet body. But Copeland has become a punching bag on this site because she draws attention to institutional racism in ballet, which makes a lot of those fans uncomfortable.

I feel sorry for the critics that have to deal with this. I doubt we'll ever read an honest review.

You shouldn't feel sorry for critics - if they can't deal with criticism/backlash/dissent re their reviews, then they're in the wrong profession. Anyhow, pretty much every major Misty review that I have read has been honest about her strengths and weaknesses. I see no reason why that trend wouldn't continue.

This is the very reason Copeland's promotion will always come with a question mark for me and many dance fans that I know. She positioned herself so that not being promoted would generate news.

If Copeland's interpretation of O/O and Juliet, and other classical roles deepen, will there still be a question mark? A promotion to principal is not always the acknowledgement of a finished product - it is also an investment in a dancer.

Not sure about your last sentence either. The classical ballet scene in New York is not the center of the universe, and I feel like most Americans don't know the difference between the dancer ranks anyway. Misty's promotion will probably be out of the news cycle by tomorrow night.

Indeed.

All we seem to have proved, in hundreds of comments on multiple threads here, is that a young woman of color is unusual enough in the ballet world as it exists today, that we are turning ourselves in and out to discuss her.

While I don't think that anyone who participates here considers themselves to be racist, and indeed I imagine would be (and is) distraught at the suggestion, I fully admit that, as a white, middle-class woman raised in the suburbs, I have been and continue to be the beneficiary of a discriminatory society. In the same way that you cannot see the log in your own eye, I probably manifest all kinds of behaviors and beliefs that I would find objectionable in others.

This is something I struggle with all the time, and will likely continue to do so until I am dead.

Systemic racism exists. So does white fragility.

We cannot get any further with these issues if we keep taking offense at the conversation.

I am grateful for the community here, and their enthusiasm for an art form near to my heart. But I think I have to take a break from this part of the website.

Thank you for your honesty and insight.

I'm sorry you seem to have so little faith in her fans.

Not all of her fans. But unfortunately, there would probably be a 50 page BA thread bemoaning why such a talented dancer has to play the "race card" to advance her career. (I hope Plisskin is right, though).

Ive enjoyed Albert Evans and Craig Hall and Carlos Acosta, and on video Arthur Mitchell.

Black men have been soloists/principals at major companies since the 1960s. There could always be more, of course. However, the bulk of my critique is focused on the dearth of black women in major companies (who rarely advance beyond the corps).

Neither I do not think Copeland's promotion is the culmination of an affirmative action/PR project, abetted by our 21st century culture of "political correctness." What I believe and the way you can tell this is because Ive actually said it is that while Copeland worked very hard to deserve promotion through her dancing, by portraying herself (no doubt because she believes it) as having had to overcome racism to make it to soloist, she put McKenzie in the very difficult spot of opening himself and the company to the same people who see racism in every criticism of her dancing to charges of racism had he not promoted her.

I guess I should be more specific here. I think the Copeland criticism falls into roughly two camps: the people who think she is a hack affirmative action ballet dancer, and the people who believe that while Copeland's dancing has some merits, she is punching above her weight class in the classics/has made race a tool to leverage a promotion. Even though the latter is a more polite-sounding sentiment than the former, both critiques are informed by the same logic. Furthermore, if McKenzie's makes personnel decisions based off of a fear of bad press, that says more about his leadership than it says about Misty.

What we see on this board is "a strain of polite" and sometimes not so polite insistence on finding what one wants to find, on reading racism into pretty much any criticism of Copeland, period.

I don't think that all criticism of Copeland is racist. Some people will not be fans, and that's okay. Unfortunately, much of what is written in this particular forum is exceedingly critical and vindictive towards Copeland. Kotchetkova and Seo are unpopular, too, but I've never read anyone attack their character on BA. TThe only thing that distinguishes Misty from them is skin color. Also, there are people who are not Copeland fans - Plisskin comes to mind - who have expressed discomfort with the tone of the conversations in the Copeland threads.

I predict that the day Francesca Hayward becomes a principal of the Royal Ballet, you will hear complaints from no one.

Hayward is great, and I hope she becomes a principal at the RB one day. She has also distanced herself from conversations about institutional racism in ballet, which is her prerogative. I imagine that if she attempted to start a conversation, she would lose a lot of fans.

It will be interesting to see how long she is a ticket draw. Personally I am disappointed that a dancer of her caliber is a principal at ABT, supposedly a world class company. I don't thing anything special about her performances.

I imagine that she will likely be a ticket draw until she retires, especially considering that she only has 5-8 dancing years left. I also wouldn't be surprised if she joins ABT in some sort of marketing/outreach capacity once she retires. Obviously, KM thinks her dancing is worthy of promotion. I don't like "Catcher In The Rye," but there are a number of people who think it is a masterpiece. Different strokes for different folks.

As for the kfw/canbelto debate: I think that there is a strain of polite racism that infests these Copeland threads like a virus. To be clear: no one in this community would ever call Misty a racial slur (but as Obama said, you don't have to use racial slurs to be a racist). Once you scratch beneath the veneer of civility, there is a widespread notion among this community that Copeland's promotion is the culmination of an affirmative action/PR project, abetted by our 21st century culture of "political correctness." This echoes the widespread assumption in our culture that blacks are inferior to whites, and must get "help" to attain a similar professional status. The preposterous notion that there are people in the dance community who actually enjoy her performances is quickly waved away.

The Misty conversations on this board remind me of the old adage among African-Americans: "you have to be twice as good to get half as much." Maybe when a Serena Williams-type groundbreaking generational talent enters the world of ballet, balletomanes will finally concede that she is, you know, kind of good.

Simone Messmer is announced as joining Miami City Ballet as a principal dancer! See http:www.miamicityballet.org/press/mcb-welcomes-simone messmer.

That's great! Glad she has found a stable dance home.

Why in the world would Misty hold a press conference separate than the company? I'm sure that reporters were looking for her to comment but still. Can't she just give a comment or release a statement? In regards to Misty in Giselle, at this stage I would just hope that I don't end up with a ticket for that show!

Do we know that it was a non-ABT press conference? Also, no one is making anyone buy tickets to Copeland performances at gunpoint. Geez.

Misty apparently held a press conference this afternoon. According to the NY Times, in addition to the lead roles she already has performed, she wants the title role in Giselle.

I don't see anything wrong with that. I imagine that most principal ABT women, including Misty, want to dance as many classical roles as possible.

Frankly I don't get any of this. Copeland has an amazing ballet body. I have seen bustier dancers and dancers with more muscular legs in major ballet companies. I can name them if you want. Many dancers have told me that Copeland's feet and legs are "to die for". A well known dancer said on a blog that she'd love to have Copeland's feet just to see what it felt like. It's not as if Copeland has short legs, a big belly and flat feet. What are we talking about here? I go to see the Ailey company regularly. These are dancers with long legs and flexible bodies. Just look at the Ailey ads and what they are selling. I'd say beautiful black woman with slender bodies and extreme extensions.If an African American audience is drawn to ABT because of Misty Copeland that's great, but to pretend that she breaks the mold of ballet bodies is false IMO.

I have read comments on this very forum where people complain about her "big calves" and overdeveloped muscles. I wonder what they are seeing...

I consider today a sad day for ABT. When a dancer who can not do the choreography is promoted to principal is a sad day in my book. Last night, as a fairy, Misty danced in her usual clunky manner. Ugly arms, heavy feet (where all the other fairies looked light). Like abatt, I think McKenzie is just trying to get a new sudience into ABT; an audience that generally does not see ballet.

Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, but I'd hardly call this a 'sad day.' Two beloved soloists were promoted to principal, and the large number of corps to soloist promotions have shown that KM is serious in investing in the home team. Misty's upper body is also a quality for which several professional critics have expressed admiration. Also, I don't understand the assumption that the members of her (mostly black) core fanbase are not regular ballet goers. I would not be surprised if there were a number of black professional dancers in the audience at Misty's SL, plus other black people who have studied ballet at some point in their lives. Furthermore, if the Times' pictures are any indication, many of Copeland's fans are young dancers as well.

Anyhow, I agree with many of the points that canbelto made earlier. There is an assumption - expressed with various levels of intensity by various people - that Misty peddled her sob story/experiences with racism to manipulate KM in to granting her a promotion. I think that it is uncomfortable for many fans to confront the fact that there are still institutional barriers that prevent black women from succeeding in top companies in 2015. Thus, they attack the messenger (Twerkgate, Fouettegate, etc).

It is clear that Misty has hit a nerve. If she "stayed in her place" by only dancing in contemporary ballets and told the Times that she had never encountered racism in her career, there would not be hundreds of pages written about her on this forum.

The fouettes are certainly important - I think I made that clear in the comment that you quoted. My point is that I would rather see a dancer with an expressive upper body who understands Odette's character arc than one who can rattle off 32 clean fouettes.

As for Misty, her development curve as a dancer has lagged behind that of her peers (which is also why her story is so unique). At the age when her peers were deciding what summer intensive to attend, she took her first ballet classes. Her rep has mostly been contemporary ballets, with the exception of the last couple of seasons. Even though she is senior in ballet years, she is just really beginning to tackle the classics in earnest. That being said, it seems as though her issues with the fouettes were mental/stamina-based (it's not like she was incapable of completing a single fouette). Nothing that can't be fixed with practice.

I think what I was referring to with the word "cheerleading" was so much of the inappropriate applause that happened at Misty's performance. Much could most likely be traced to inexperience or understanding of the work at hand, but also it reflects the way many react in today's world to just the fact that someone is on stage. People start screaming and applauding before anyone has done anything! One sees this a lot at YAGP performances also. And on SYTYCD. I'm fine with the press doing stories, etc. Also, self promotion if that's your thing. But to constantly interrupt a performance is annoying at worst and seems gratuitous at best. Real respect for what the artist is doing would be to engulf oneself in the whole performance and show appreciation at the appropriate times. White, black, polka dot. Every artist deserves that.

Oh, thanks for clarifying! I understand your frustration. I imagine that the applause probably disrupted the evening - and bristled the hardcore balletomanes - but I also think that people show appreciation in different ways. I saw DTH at City Center a few months ago, and I sat in front of a group of young girls who repeatedly "oohed" and "aahed" during the Agon PDD. I could have interpreted that as a sign of disrespect, but their outbursts were really spontaneous expressions of wonder. I'm sure that many of the adults in Misty's SL felt that way too (especially if they aren't frequent ballet goers), plus the historical/cultural significance of the evening.

The next talented African-American ballerinas who rise through the ranks at ABT will owe Copeland a debt for weathering this firestorm.

Absolutely. And re Fouettegate (downthread): I'm sure that if Kent remains with ABT as a ballet mistress, then she will likely shape Copeland's subsequent interpretations of the role.

So well put, Turandot, but I fear the cheer leading is here to stay. Somewhere on another thread someone commented on the changes happening in ballet based on all the competitions, etc. that are now out there. The art form has slowly evolved (downward, IMO), to something more like exhibitionism. The PR and hoopla have become the story and not the artistry. I somehow doubt that Misty can now go back into the studio and "learn" how it's done. That ship has sailed. As you say, what may have been a promise may now be nothing more than a shell and a compromise. If every time she steps on point (in any role) it becomes an applause moment, then I'm afraid she will fail to grow as an artist. As Macauley pointed out in his overly kind and careful review Misty is little more than potential waiting to be revealed.

I wouldn't necessarily call it "cheerleading" - Copeland gets a lot of press because she's a black woman in a field that has a tradition of excluding black women. (The fact that she is based in New York and in a major international company are both also big factors). While many would like to read more stories about Sara(hs) Mearns and Lane, "White Ballerina Dances Really Well" is not a headline that grabs the attention of the mainstream press. If anything, you should support Misty's 'PR' - which is designed to encourage lots of black girls to study ballet (and not, as many cynically suggest, to bully KM into promoting her to principal).

As for ballet's obsession with gymnastics/six o' clock extensions, that should probably be traced back to Sylvie Guillem. And Tiler Peck began her career in jazz dance competitions and still matured into a fine artist.

Tackling the classics in her 30s for the first time cannot be easy for Misty. I am sure that like most dancers, she puts a lot of pressure on herself and is constantly looking to improve (and wants to feel like any promotion she may receive has been earned).

So you'd prefer that the company not only brought in fewer guest artists but also had fewer non-American regular principals on its roster? That'd be quite a change from decades of its tradition.

I would like to see more development opportunities for talented corps members and soloists. I think that many of the complaints re the artistic 'fallowness' of ABT would be ameliorated if the home team was given more opportunities. If that means limiting opportunities to established international stars who could guest at any major classical company in the world, then I'm okay with that.

Isn't the School in lower Manhattan? They are opening another school tied to Segerstrom in Costa Mesa, but I didn't think that meant they would close the NYC school. And don't they have studios at 890 Broadway? It's certainly been a problem that they haven't had their own residence theater, but it's not clear how they could solve that.

You are correct re the JKO School, California! (I take that comment back). As for the comment about ABT having its own performance space - I understand that will certainly not happen overnight, if ever. My first paragraph was primarily for pipe dreams.

My pipe dream would be for the JKO School to relocate to NYC, and to really cultivate a 'house style.' ABT also needs to get its own space, and I would like to see the international principals/guest artists' performances restricted to a big, fancy fundraising gala (with the exception of Gomes, Cornejo, Part, and maybe Osipova).

More practical things: update the website and YouTube channel, provide opportunities for corps members and soloists to choreograph, hire Julie Kent as a ballet mistress, promote Arron Scott/Brandt/Royal/Trenary to soloist, promote Lane/Abrera/Copeland to principal (though I am cringing internally at the 50 pages of hand wringing and theatrics that will subsequently occur), more mixed bills!

I am confused again. I thought Copeland was doing fouettes started to travel, fell out of one and then switched to turns from fifth. Is that the case or did she do pique turns in a circle?

Didn't mean to add to the confusion! I would look at Natalia's (positive) and nysusan's (negative) reviews for context.

It's very likely that Misty completed the 32 fouettes in rehearsal, but strange, unexpected things happen in performances (especially a high-profile debut). The fact that she made the choice to do a pique circle and not totally bail shows quick thinking and professionalism.

And even though City Ballet's SL is not in the Petipa style, Mearns has made the excellent point that the fouettes - while important - are only a portion of the evening. It seems as though Misty's characterization of Odette was strong, which, frankly is the most important part of the ballet. The technical issues can be worked out in the studio.

It's a decidedly guarded review. For once, Macaulay is afraid to offend. He takes obvious flaws and spins them as something positive. Copeland's inability to complete the required fouettes, and substituting quick single turns instead? "A smart alternative." What?! Can you imagine how he would tear through a dancer from NYCB, or any other ABT dancer, who chose not to display technical skill while making their major NY debut?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/26/arts/misty-copeland-debuts-as-odette-odile-in-swan-lake.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=mini-moth®ion=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below

As others have observed, Macaulay regards Mearns as the best O/O dancing the role today, and she did not complete all of the fouettes during her debut.

I think that the harshest Misty critics will always think that she is punching above her weight class in the classics, regardless of the actual product on the stage. Other cooler heads will be able to assess the positives and negatives of her performances. For the record, Wendy Perron enjoyed her Odette.

ABC reports that Lauren Anderson and Raven Wilkinson both congratulated Copeland onstage afterward. (And Damien Woetzel felt it was an "honor" to be there. I guess he felt it was an honor that they sold him a ticket. I wish people would quit misusing that word).

Mearns was still indeed the corps when she debuted in Swan Lake.

Maybe he actually enjoyed the performance? (A shock, I know!)

Redmayne played a real person with a visually striking disease, which the Academy is big on, but he may get aced by Bradley Cooper in American Sniper.

Interesting observation! I thought that Redmayne and Cumberbatch might cancel each other out (two English period pieces), but Redmayne seems to have all the momentum. Even though American Sniper has done well at the box office, reviews have been somewhat mixed, and Cooper seems to be the new DiCaprio (a perennial nominee who never wins). I feel like Steve Carell - wearing a prosthetic nose and playing wildly against type - will probably be the spoiler in that category.

At the bottom of the Golden Globes thread, dirac made the following remark:

Thanks for bringing up the nominees, Pique Arabesque. I have not seen "Selma" yet but plan to do so, although I am not encouraged by reports that LBJ has been turned into some sort of comic book villain.

I was unable to bring myself to actually see "Boyhood" in a theater. I am less willing to commit three hours or so of my time to new movies than I used to be, and it sounded respectable, earnest, and boring. Please tell us what you thought when you have a chance, perhaps in a new thread?

I would definitely encourage everyone who hasn't already seen "Selma" to go as soon as possible. After viewing the film, I really do not understand the source of the LBJ controversy. I think it is important to remember that LBJ was a politician - not an activist. He is largely in agreement with King and the other Civil Rights activists, but doesn't want the dominoes to fall as quickly as King did. Also, Tom Wilkinson is wonderful in the role. The cinematography - particularly the "Bloody Sunday" sequence - is absolutely devastating.

"Boyhood" was also very good. It is almost three hours, but I felt that the time passed by quickly. I never felt bored - Patricia Arquette is probably going to win a Best Supporting Actress Oscar next month, and deservedly so. Her performance anchors the entire film. Ethan Hawke and Lorelei Linklater are also excellent. Unfortunately, Ellar Coltrane became less and less interesting to me as he aged, but the supporting cast and Linklater's direction made the film "work."

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to see any of the other nominated films, though I believe that Eddie Redmayne (The Theory of Everything) and Julianne Moore (Still Alice) are favored to win Best Actor and Best Actress, respectively.

The full list of nominations can be found here.