Marta

55 minutes ago, Rock said:

I believe it's all about having a "tag" - the theory being people are more inclined to buy a program with a "tag" on it - All Balanchine, All Tschaikovsky, All New, 21st Century - Barocco/Balanchine/Broadway - any name they can think up helps sell the evening, or so the theory goes. I suppose it's true but boy do I miss rep. It was so thrilling to have a different mix every night. 

I never loved the theme idea that NYCB came up with 10 or more years ago.  I do love the all Balanchine or the Balanchine B & W but as Vipa said, I also would be thrilled to see a program with an indisputably great Balanchine and two new works, or two by other choreographers, new or not.  I'd be curious to know which programs had higher ticket sales.  

I also was curious  about what The Traveling Ballerina didn't like about "Symphony in C".  TB,  find the  comment from your review "...perhaps a ballet with a cast of around fifty dancers is an ambitious undertaking for a company that has no leadership" curious too!   This ballet is so rich in contrasts and moods that I suggest at least a few more viewings.   One can only begin to perceive this ballet in a single performance.

I've been thoroughly enjoying all the reviews.  I'm late with my impressions of the only two performances I was able to see in the first week of the season:  Jewels on Thursday night, and the all Balanchine on Friday.  I was excited to see Kowroski in Diamonds and thought she was magnificent.  Her dancing transported me into another realm and, as someone has said here, seemed to give form to an "inner life" quality. I loved Bouder and de Luz in Rubies!  Both were great and fulfilled all expectations.  Kretzschmar as the Tall Girl didn't seem any taller than the other women and although she danced well enough,  I really wanted to see Reichlen-- always. Emeralds was a disappointment. Both Stafford  and Angle looked stiff and danced out. Angle particularly had a portly look not helped by the unflattering costume.  He should retire this role. The all Balanchine program was wonderful.  Reichlen in Barocco was fantastic and Stafford seemed like a different dancer than in Emeralds.  I didn't think the two women looked that terrific together.  Peck and de Luz were thrilling in Tschai PdD. All the superlatives have been said; I loved it and I was absolutely thrilled to see de Luz twice.  Stravinsky Violin: I liked Hyltin very much in this and thought  all the dancers were good except la Cour who at times looked tired and effortful .  In the Bizet, Joseph Gordon was great! He really stood out with his clean technique and light jump.  I saw him in spring in Coppelia and he was excellent.  Kowroski and Angle were gorgeous in the adagio, even though I could barely take my eyes off Kowroski. Troy Schumacher stood out in the last movement and I've never noticed him before. Spartak Hoxha was impressive in 3 or 4 of the ballets I saw. He's been in the corps for a long time.  I'm looking forward to seeing more of Woodward, Janzen, Olivia Boisson and Miriam Miller.

On 9/13/2018 at 7:59 PM, cobweb said:

“Inner life” - my most favorite ballerina attribute. I have not been viewing the NY ballet scene for nearly as long as many of you. In that mystical category, Veronika Part, Kowroski, and Laracey come top of mind. As we all wait for performances to begin, who else in recent years populates this category?

Also I echo CTballetfan’s call to Megan Fairchild: come back soon!!

Agree about who gives us glimpses of  their "inner life", especially  Veronika  Part.  I don't know if any other women in ABT are in that category. Kowroski and Reichlen do share some roles but they are quite different. Jennie Somogyi comes to mind too. She was a very individual dancer that I saw too little of. 

I nominate Marina Harss as the next Chief Dance Critic of the NYT.  She's knowledgeable about many forms of dance  as well as opera and music.  I think [but don't know] that she has also had real live experienced at the ballet barre.  Hers is a fresh voice with a slightly different perspective.

1 hour ago, Kaysta said:

I know enough of the facts to come to a reasonable conclusion:

1.  Finlay resigned before he could be investigated

2.  NYCB did an investigation and punished two dancers (one whom is exceedingly popular) and put out a statement essentially saying while they—NYCB—are not guilty, , they did have enough evidence to suspend dancers they were relying on for their fall season.   I’m sure NYCB has seen the texts and did not decide to suspend without evidence.

 

I am not going to feel bad for someone who abuses others.  Women are not farm animals.  Covering up or minimizing abuse is not ok with me, no matter who does it.  No matter how great a dancer they are.  No matter how much I love the institution they are a part of.

Further, whether I, or you, forgive Chase Finlay means nothing.  We are not the victims here.

Thank you Kaysta for  one of the best summaries I've read. I completely agree.  

2 hours ago, Helene said:

Does anyone know who the dancers are in Lovette's photo?

Tiler Peck, Unity Phelan, Miriam Miller ... forget who is the dancer on extreme left.  If you click on their faces, their names come up.

Amy Reusch, 

I don't know if Baryshnikov ever coached the PdD you refer to from Other Dances for the archives, but this spring he coached OD with de Luz and Peck.  Haven't heard that Makarova was invited to coach at City Ballet though. 

MintyLee said:

Your suggestion that no friend or parent warned her that dating Chase might not be a good idea possibly takes for granted how stubborn a headstrong young woman can be (some, not all), but I do agree and struggle with the thought that the people in her life could have done more to protect her from someone with that reputation. We have a responsibility to protect young women who might be more impressionable at that age than we are at ours. Might you also agree then that others also might have had responsibility in protecting her from someone with that reputation? Perhaps responsible parties that knew more concrete, everyday details of his actions? Perhaps responsible parties that might have more in their arsenal of course-correcting remedies than late night texts and sad-faced emojis? Perhaps... an employer? 

Well, they didn't warn her, or she didn't listen. Or the friend or parent didn't know more than she did. Why would "responsible parties" know more concrete details of Finlay's actions?  It's not as if his actions were common knowledge among non dancers.

26 minutes ago, MarzipanShepherdess said:

The victim-blaming in this thread is getting insane, with all these statements about how Waterbury knew Finlay had “a kink” and insinuating that Waterbury got what was coming to her for not having broken up with him after he asked her to pose nude.

This is the same reasoning that is used to say that rape victims who wore sexy clothing or walked home alone at night were “asking for it”. No one deserves to have their consent violated! 

I understand that NYCB is a beloved institution that some feel is not culpable in these events, but it is perfectly possible to disagree with Waterbury’s suit against NYCB without descending to statements that imply abuse victims are complicit in their own abuse because they should have known better. 

Enthusiastically agree.  As Nanushka  said above, I also fail to see the relevance of many of these comments to Waterbury's specific complaint against Finlay.

8 minutes ago, ECat said:

Thank you all for such insightful information on this topic.  I am appalled and highly disappointed by the actions of Chase Finlay and the other people who took part in this.  Please how can I read the entire complaint?

I think this is the path.  I scribbled it down and hope it's complete.  Go to:

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/Login

You'll be asked to enter the code to prove you're not a robot. Then you enter the case number:

158220/2018

52 minutes ago, Drew said:

Fair warning? There is no evidence she knew or could have known he was sending around nude or semi-unclothed photos of her without her consent or that she knew he videotaped her in intimate situations (not just photographing her). Though I suppose his lawyer may try to claim that....But, taking the case as it has been presented in the complaint: how is she responsible for having known ahead of time what he was capable of? Plenty of substance abusers —even kinky ones — do NOT do what Finlay is charged with doing. And plenty of people older and more experienced than Waterbury have found themselves abused and taken advantage of by boyfriends/girlfriends... Waterbury does not have "to take responsibility" for being the victim of improper and probably illegal action.

It may well be the case that a judge will agree with you that NYCB is not legally liable and not let the suit against the company go forward. I don't know the law but she is not an NYCB employee. I suppose it's possible a judge may decide that determination of the company's responsibility can’t be made without more evidence being presented concerning allegations about the company and company "culture" made in the complaint.  That means depositions etc. Either way, it doesn’t mean Waterbury does not sincerely believe company culture played a role in her ordeal.  (And, for that matter, I suppose information about the company and not just Finlay may come out in a suit against Finlay alone.) But I don't think her motives should be an issue here anyway. She has the right to try to deploy the law to her full advantage.

 Legalities aside: does one believe the company has thoroughly looked into things mentioned in the complaint that do have a bearing on workplace issues for all the dancers? I hope so, and I know I should say high-mindedly that I am suspending judgment on that. But truthfully I am skeptical -- partly for the reason mentioned in earlier posts that their statements on these issues have sometimes seemed to me weak and/or problematic.

Very well stated, and I completely agree.  Opinions on what Waterbury should or should not have done or known about seem rather unfair.  I'm skeptical too about the probity of the company's investigation.

I read all the articles and the complaint. Appalling and disgusting only begin to describe this ugly behavior.  There are many valuable comments here and  I gave up trying to quote all the ones I agreed with!  Finlay is so disrespectful to women, indeed it seems as if he hates them.  He is  so adolescent and stupid that it's difficult to imagine he only started acting this way because NYCB  "gave him permission" to do so.  I don't know how much the environment there is responsible for how these dancers operate.  Certainly the organization can't control what dancers do or say on their personal time.  I  noticed almost immediately that the donor was not named anywhere. That's infuriating, and does not look good for the board.  Also, maybe it's not relevant, but the  inconsistencies and quality of writing in the complaint were questionable.  I don't know what the solution is.   I will continue to attend performances because these horrible people don't represent the company.  The board is not the company.  The dancers are!  

On 8/30/2018 at 12:27 PM, rkoretzky said:

Mark Morris? 

Taylor was the last titan of modern dance. Very sad news.  Morris or Tharp are not in the same generation -- or league, in my opinion.

16 minutes ago, nanushka said:

I haven't had time to read very far into Jacobs' new book (only about a chapter when it first came out), but I've definitely had the same feeling @cobweb and @angelica describe about her writing in general. She has a lot of passion for her subject, but it's frustratingly difficult to pin down the specific ideas and insights that could really substantiate that passion.

That said, I always appreciated her (and her husband's) championing of Veronika Part (a dancer who always inspired similar rapture in me — so I couldn't blame Jacobs quite so much in that case!), and I do intend to read the rest of the book with an open mind.

So true. While I enjoyed her book, I was aware of its flaws.  I think her reviews and critical writings in other publications are far better and don't try to include something for everyone.  I love Veronika Part too, and that I knew Jacobs was a fan influenced my decision to read Jacobs' book. 

3 hours ago, nanushka said:

Also Reagan may not be a great example, considering how that all played out.

Also Trump is decisively not a good example.  However,  there could  be a 70 something person who'd do a good job as president  or artistic director.  Farrell was my first thought back in January. But given that Martins will have at least some influence on  the decision, I don't see her being hired. Andersen or Lopez, yes, but do they really want to leave their companies, especially Lopez? 

8 hours ago, lmspear said:

Woetzel is the fist name that pops into my head as an ideal candidtate for both the NYCB and Julliard positions.  I have no idea who else was being considered for the Julliard Presidency, but I think he will have more visibility at Julliard than at NYCB, plus given the chaos of Lincoln Center leadership over the last couple of years, positioning him at Julliard would hopefully give NYCB a second supportive voice in Center-wide negotiations and gives him a wider pool of potential contacts, inluding donors,  to use if he successfully completes a respectable length of service at Julliard.

I really like Woetzel too. I would be surprised if he ditched Juilliard.

bcash said:  Speaking about overall leadership style and innovative drive, I really think Millepied, from two documentaries on his short-lived tenure at POB, would make a great director. 

Please, anyone but Millepied!  

I think Steifel danced in City Ballet for a while, but point taken.

On 8/16/2018 at 3:27 AM, Amy Reusch said:

Ballet Master in Chief with the rest of the  ballet masters in tow, reporting to a king...   

Artistic Director reporting to a Chairman of the Board plus the rest of the Board ...

Am trying to consider if it is the same....  does the singularity one one side make a difference?

Artistic Director reporting to a Chair of the Board.

On 8/15/2018 at 2:11 PM, Helene said:

I think it was the "In Chief" part that caught Cooper's eye.

Totally agree.  As stated earlier, Balanchine called himself Ballet Master.  The term choreographer was possibly not as commonly used as it is today.

Aurora said;  

Lady painter is certainly not a modern phrase. It is exceptionally old fashioned (Victorian era). And is often not very accurate. Rosa Bonheur was certainly female but she was no lady.

Even woman poet (etc) are not what I would consider modern usage.

If you are going to designate the gender of the artist (in whatever medium), I'd argue "Female poet" or "female artist" is more the norm.

Lady painter, woman poet  and all their sibling terms, like woman doctor, male  nurse, etc. sound so antiquated they're comical.  Almost.

On 8/15/2018 at 12:20 PM, ABT Fan said:

I never thought of it like that, but I'd agree that it is.

I haven't understood the recent preference of females calling themselves "actors" instead of "actresses". I guess I'd need to hear the explanations as to why. Possibly it's because "actor" means "one who acts" and in its true definition isn't gender specific, at least according to Webster: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/actor. (Though, that word has come to signify "male".) So, perhaps the female actors see the feminization of their job title as sexist. Along the lines of "I'm an actor. Period. What does my gender have to do with it?" If that's their theory, I'd completely agree with that.

Anyhow...

Personally, I prefer "Artistic Director" and, I agree that Ballet Mistress in Chief doesn't work for numerous reasons.

I too appreciate the thoughtfulness the search committee is putting into this, but also wonder how long it'll be before that person takes over. 

Actor shouldn't really be gender specific. We say poet and not poetess, even though the latter exists. Singer, not songstress.  Since English is not a language with true genders, like romance languages, it makes sense to use the  same  word to describe all people who practice the same art form.  Painter, not paintress.  Potter or ceramicist. No female sculptor I know wants to be described as a sculptress. It sounds trivializing.

On 8/15/2018 at 12:13 PM, Helene said:

"Artistic Director" or "Co-Artistic Director" has long been the go-to title for the role.  "Ballet Master" was Balanchine's preference: it was good enough for Petipa.  

If Martins had been the sole head of the company at succession, it would have been pretentious for him to have assumed that title.  With Robbins in the mix, and with a staff of Ballet Masters and Mistresses -- I think they still referred to Dunleavy as a "Ballet Mistress" back then -- they couldn't call them "Co-Ballet Masters."  Instead of changing the title to "Co-Artistic Director," which would have acknowledged that no one could replace Balanchine and have started with a clean slate, they settled on the awkward "Co-Ballet Master-in-Chief," which just showed that Martins, in particular*, needed the "In Chief," with its positional rather than referent authority.

*Robbins was running his own company-within-a-company artistically, and no one thought the was the overall person in charge.

"Ballet Master" was good enough for Balanchine, but apparently not for Martins. I always disliked that "in chief".  Maybe it's a good idea to retire the BM title and use Artistic Director.

I enjoyed the book a lot.  It has something for the hard core balletomane as well as for  more casual dancegoers or newcomers.  Her style is flowing and her knowledge is impressive. It didn't hurt that some of her favorite dancers are also my own!  I loved the section on Serenade. Her opinions on why certain greats of 20th century dance were important are  concise and  very well stated.  My only criticism is that I did not like the drawings.

She was the greatest.  

My top picks would be Kim, Shklyarov, Sarafanov, all unlikely to cross the pond I think.  Muntagirov is terrific and I think may have guested at ABT a few years ago.  Semyon Chudin or Heymann would be good choices too.  My absolute last choice is Golding who leaves me completely cold, even without the weird grimaces.  I also thought of Finlay, although not of Catazaro but they seem unlikely to cross the plaza.  Has any City Ballet dancer ever been a guest at ABT, other than Veyette who only danced  one ballet?

Your comment reminded me that I'd read a review of a bio of Yakobson -- although I didn't read the book. In case you haven't seen it, here it is:

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/23/books/review-like-a-bomb-going-off-leonid-yakobson-and-ballet-as-resistance-in-soviet-russia.html