balletforme

DC Export, I agree that balletgoers do indeed to face the kind of antiquated values of traditional ballet. Hopefully, by patronizing companies that seek an integration of modern values with the art form. I think, if any company, NYCB probably challenges many of these values with new works? And our US culture is youth-focused. Not just ballet. Older people are the only group that it is ok to be rude to, disparage on tv programs, or to openly joke about--we are deeply ageist. Yes, some of the posts are " going to go to such great lengths to discredit Martins’s accomplishments, relationships, leadership, and intellectual property" BUT Most are simply observing that repeated negative issues with the head of an organization (and the distractions that these cause to an organization) merit a change. You can believe that Martins needs to be replaced and has acted in abusive ways but not detract from his other accomplishments. And really, what kind of an argument is it that Robbins and Balanchine acted poorly? We have come so far since then. We have higher standards. We embrace their artistic legacy but look for the organization to progress. And I think that Balanchine really was progressive in so many ways for his time. Perhaps not when it came to gender roles but, for example, he appeared to be one of the first in the US to employ dancers of color, for example?At least I think he did. I think Martins is gifted and skilled and amazing but apparently that is coming at a cost to him and to people in the organization. At this point what he is offering the organization does not outweigh the damage that he is doing. He is now a problem, a distraction, and a liability. The organization is doing what organizations do--protect themselves.

EXACTLY> OR being allowed to be the CEO of a company? You or I would never get away with that crap in our professions. Maybe one indiscretion or possibly 2 but multiple? NO. Rules were different for Martins and the board was either clueless or just looked the other way.

Damien Woetzel? Solid executive experience, artistic and teaching? Being "right next door" he might be able to learn the intricacies of the position with a transition team.

Agree. She has good relationships with people but does not seem to have the basic requirements to do the job.

I agree that he is a strong candidate but he isn't really a choreographer. . is he? And that appears to be part of the NYCB tradition/

Yes there is a "piling on" in the Times article of all the sins of the ballet world but here is what is NOT debatable or shoddy. -2 DUIs -1 arrest for assault -1 anonymous letter calling behavior into question -Jeffrey Edwards REPORTED abuse -Kelly Boal tells a story of abuse that she did not report -Gelsey Kirkland reports him dragging her downstairs by her hair. Culture did allow this and probably would have continued to had not so many come forward. HE IS BEING GIVEN DUE PROCESS. There is an independent investigation. He has decided not to allow that to play out despite the fact that he denies wrong doing. He resigned of his own free will. This man is not a victim of anything but his own choices. Yes, he is complicated, gifted, and did some incredible things but there has come a day of reckoning. I just regret that this has so damaged and traumatized and compromised the organization.

THANK YOU! And Martins behavior was not "yelling" he was physically assaulting people and seemed to have a thing about the neck. Pulling people by the neck, choking, Please let's not confuse the issues.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/02/arts/dance/peter-martins-city-ballet-balanchine.html Nice piece that addresses many of the issues that are bubbling up in this discussion. I would just hate for the selection to be fulfilling some "agenda" outside of moving the company forward in quality and artistry. But that's probably silly.

I don't know that there is really any indication that Peter Boal has any interest in the job. I read the very thorough Where Snowflakes . . book and he seems to be much beloved in Seattle and honestly, don' t you think that Kelly would have discussed her position with her husband before making a statement? He's no dummy. He knows that her doing so would hurt any chances. They appear to have a good marriage. Kay runs SAB but there is a tradition of the NYCB AD being "co-chairman" because Balanchine started the school--But First a School (another great book). They will stick with that. It's tradition. Killian is likely next in line to run the school. Jonathon Stafford has the executive skills but no choreography. Peck has artistic and choreography but not a real executive person. Whelan could be but well, I concur not a lot of experience. Wasn't she at odds with Martins a bit? At least that's what I thought from her movie. Margaret Tracey I don't really think is viable at all. Honestly, there really is not a strong connection between the school she runs and Mikko. It seems like the disconnect between JKO and Kevin McKenzie. I do think that Woetzel is a candidate, despite his Julliard position. He's more a full package--artist and executive. Running Vail and now running Julliard. Yes, Heather Watts spoke out against Martins but, for some reason, I just think he might have a shot??? Rosemary Dunleavy is probably heavily leaned on since she has been a ballet mistress for some time. Many dancers talk about her. If the board goes with an "interim team" I think they will keep the current team--Stafford, Krohn, Hall, Peck. Why not? Why have another interim group or figure and then a final decision--too much disruption. I think that that the Martins family is terribly dysfunctional and has been for years.

Agreed

"As the investigation was being conducted an apparent split emerged among former and current dancers over the fate of Mr. Martins." NYTTimes: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/01/arts/dance/peter-martins-resigns-ballet.html "In recent interviews 24 women and men all former dancers at the company or school--described a culture of intimidation under Mr. Martins which they say has hurt the careers of generations of performers." Ashley Bouder posted this: Time's up on silence Time's up on waiting. Time's up on tolerating discrimination, harassment, and abuse.

YES! This all goes to the very nature of art and its purposes. Should art chronicle, disrupt, query, confront, disturb? What is art should intentionally harm the artists in the making? This is why I have such trouble with the Streb stuff.

One would assume that Gomes has "paid the price" for transgressions and Europe and Russia would not ask. I don't know that Russian ballet companies would be casting stones over "foolishness," if that is what we shall call this. There is certainly scads of drama and "foolishness" within Russian companies.

We don't know what is in Gome's contract.

The point of the post was to bring attention to the official descriptions from official press releases/ letters NYCB and SAB could not have responded to accusations that have come forward about Martins since then. I guess that I would also point out that both organizations DID hire law firms to investigate the matters in an attempt to be fair. Gomes, for whatever reason (guilt? shocked? scared? inexperienced, threatened? uninformed? ill-advised? wanted to move on? didn't want a prolonged waiting) chose not to allow the process to play out. And we really don't know what the accusations against Gomes are apart from "sexual misconduct" "highly concerning." It's just not known. So, in my opinion, we can't make Gomes a victim or a monster. Maybe he was being smart. Certainly a beloved and talented dancer. But what else, we do not really know.

From official press releases/ letters Martins: general, non-specific allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct in the past . .. at both the Company and the School. Martins denied allegations Gomes: a highly concerning allegation of sexual misconduct occurring 8 years ago. . . . .ABT does not tolerate the alleged behavior. Gomes? We have no idea what occurred and Gomes makes no statement.

Just to add to this conversation. One thing that I read yesterday was that many companies actually require binding arbitration which could actually prevent filing suit. This is, in my opinion, a law that could change-- The requirement of binding arbitration will not stand in cases of sexual harassment and/or assault.

I hear the critiques but I still maintain that women will likely become more (assertive, informed, savvy, fill in your own adjective). Women will change and men will as well. And, well, we have a ton of laws, and systems but in order for those to work people must correctly use them. Many issues can't be solved legislatively. It's always a popular approach with the politicians but unless the laws are really lacking, it's not really a solution. Norms in certain industries (ballet, entertainment) must change. Peter Martins did this because there was a larger culture that was complicit. And Helene, I actually do have hope and expectation. It's a life philosophy and, in many respects a cognitive choice.

No people did not accept sexual harassment in previous eras. They just did not get as much support from courts or employers. Perhaps that will change. I am hopeful that once the hysteria fades and the truly abusive people are outed the dialogue can move forward in new and productive ways. I believe that it will change because I am hopeful that the #metoo movement will help women change, as well as men. I hope that women will learn how/when/where/why to speak up so that they can clearly draw boundaries. To really stop this, women must say to male perpetrators, "Please stop."

Peter Wolff, in essence was saying, " This is just an emotional, hysterical female." That's kind of the refrain that echos to discredit victims. BUT, Darcie, in a sense gave him ammunition by dropping the charges. Note: I judge her not.

We're misunderstanding due process (See Op Ed). Certainly companies will want to protect themselves from unfair hiring practices but they do not need to abide by "due process." https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-due-process-assault-freak-out-is-a-fever-dream/2017/12/01/8f14cd80-d6d5-11e7-a986-d0a9770d9a3e_story.html?utm_term=.935c753f88fb "Due process, first and foremost, is a legal concept, invoked to ensure that government follows the rule of law. It’s when a governmental entity disregards someone’s rights that due process’s associated requirements — fair notice and fair hearing — come into play. But corporations aren’t courts of law, and the “Today” show isn’t a government entity. Human resources officers aren’t dispassionate federal judges; they’re risk managers for the organizations they serve." "An employer doing damage control after a lurid sexual-harassment scandal need not follow any due process apart from what’s written into its private contracts. The Constitution doesn’t oblige NBC to retain Matt Laueruntil a court somewhere finds him guilty of a sex crime." "We aren’t seeing an epidemic of men being railroaded for flirting. There is no wave of false accusations washing defenseless men from their rightful careers. The cases taking over the news weren’t sparked by untouchable accusers whose pointed fingers have the power to ruin careers. Instead, we’ve uncovered systemic, ongoing patterns of abuse perpetrated by men with power against women with much less of it. The evidence isn’t scanty, and the accusations aren’t random. There is never just one victim. And due process, invoked indulgently, often allows the guilty to linger in power for far longer than they deserve."

I started it. The bullying stuff was so tragic. Made me so sad. I have high schoolers and it happens. ABT Fan--You are spot on. Not a writer at all but content is intriguing. I find the narrative kind of flat. It just reminds me of a "typical" ballet bio. Kwf. . . I look forward to getting to the end and exploring this theme. Whelan's husband. . You are human then an artist, then a dancer, then a ballet dancer.

Yes, the board appears to have been somewhat complicit throughout the years. Yes Helene, I find it creepy too. Organizations will first and foremost protect themselves over and above individuals. If it is in the organization's best interest to keep someone they will. If it is not they won''t. Martins is done because he now compromises the organization. He has attracted bad press and associates the organization with a lurid trend. He was clearly physically violent with many people including women with whom he was in relationships--Franks was right--"a basher." NYCB wants to rid itself of this connection. In terms of SAB, I can't imagine parents signing back on to allow their children to stay at SAB with Martins figuratively at the head. In terms of Kathryn Morgan, honestly, I just don't think that she was very thoughtful at all. If she did feel the need to make a statement it might have been better to simply prepare something written and share it. My perspective is that she is simply not sharp and hadn't even thought through things like rape, sexual harassment, sexual assault. It does not reflect well on her, IMO. I don't think many people thought that Martins had raped anyone. (Given the current apparent trend of physically dominating and assaulting people it now seem possible but it's really not been alleged by anyone.) There is striking similarity in many of the accounts-grabbing people by the neck?

Thanks Helene and one more question, is it possible that the NYCB board influences casting and hiring decisions other than the AD? Do they address hiring issues that emerge with dancers? Does the board influence apprentice choices?

Can I ask a question with respect to the Board? These are volunteers with deep pockets, kind of? A kind of insiders group?