citibob

Most of the dancers in my company are into the Red Sox --- and I checked the score on my cell phone after the show. Wow, the Cubs and Red Sox are both hot this year. It must be some kind of alignment of the planets...

The difference between dance and other types of intellectual property we typically fight over is that dance is inherently local. If you copy a Disney DVD and sell it to your friend, there is a good case to be made that you've just deprived Disney of revenue. After all, THEY wanted to sell that DVD to your friend --- and they CAN, because DVDs are a mass medium. Ballet is different. If ABT successfully prevents a Cuban ballet company from presenting LS, then all they've done is deprived Cuban audiences an opportunity to see the work. It's not as if any of the Cuban audience are likely to come to NYC or DC to see ABT's "authorized" versions. The audience of the National Ballet of Cuba is so far outside of ABT's market, I don't think it makes one whit of difference to ABT --- unless ABT had plans for an up-coming Cuban tour that was going to be sold based on Les Sylphides (highly doubtful). Ballet is inherently regional.

I've found its very common for male dancers to treat the ladies like children --- even if the ladies have a lot more experience, are olders, etc.

New York Times measured her at 5'6". And yes, she was reported to weight 109lb. That just confirms that height and weight have NOTHING to do with this issue. They're just exuses being used to fire her. Supposedly, none of the men are willing to dance with her. We are not told why, and may never know. But that is probably closer to the crux of the issue.

Here are two articles about it from the Charleston Post and Courier: http://charleston.net/stories/020903/art_0..._09ballet.shtml http://www.charleston.net/stories/090603/l...6balletco.shtml

Balanchine WAS interested in training his dancers a certain way and hiring them from his school. That probably had something to do with it in the past. Many seemingly small technique issues in ballet actually have a lot to do with being together --- for example, if you stick your leg out a bit to the side in arabesque instead of behind you, then when you step onto it you'll suddenly be out of formation. There is certainly a fine art to figuring out just how to discipline the corps. You have to look at it and see what sticks out that you don't like and change it. You can't just harp on everything because there's no time for that. That's one reason Balanchine was so good. Good corps doesn't necessarily mean great line on everyone --- but it DOES mean choosing a line that everyone can do adequately well, and then agreeing on the details of how that line will be accomplished so everyone does it the same way. We did a dance recently in which a LOT of precision and uniformity was required of the ladies' corps, but for dramatic reasons was not so desired of the male corps. This came through in the rehearsal process. The ladies were told exactly where to put their fingers, etc. But the men were not, and hence we all did our steps a little bit differently from each other. Many things were left undefined.

We danced to Beethoven's "Great Fugue". The counts are absolutely irregular. You can't just "feel along" a 1-2-3 1-2-3 or 1-2-3-4, etc. You have to KNOW how the music goes. At first we counted it all; graduatlly, we came to just know what was happening in the music without counting it out. I would say this isn't so much different from easy music, except that the process of learning the rhythm of the easy music is accomplished in about 5 seconds rather than a year or more.

Always remember the Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules!

It's never good to hire someone for a job and then not ask that person to do the job. It's not good for the employer or employee.

I resonate with Carbro. I might point out that the original regional companies --- just about everything but the original efforts in NYC and SF --- had a different genesis from, say, NYCB. They were not started on a shoestring by a visionary. Rather, they were started after Balanchine had made a splash and there was funding to establish ballet companies in the rest of the country. These companies appeared on the scene relatively quickly. Many major, well-funded American ballet companies NEVER had a visionary period like that of NYCB and George Balanchine. As for changes with new AD's and stuff --- one has to expect that when management changes, dancers will change. Dancers came because they liked what they saw in the old management. When the new management comes, they may not like it as much --- it is a choice foisted upon them, rather than one they made. This is not to say anything good or bad about the new management. It's only natural to look around at that time and ask "is this really what I want?" I think this happens in any corporate setting. Similarly, the AD should have some leeway in working with dancers he thinks he can work well with. Personally: if my AD were replaced, I would almost certainly leave with him --- or simply leave. Is something dreadfully wrong at BB? I have no clue. But I see little evidence of it from what people have said in this thread. There's nothing worse than being hired as a manager or director of something and then not be allowed to manage or direct as you best know how.

French words involve NO accented syllables; all syllables must have the same strength. Therefore, the great choreographer is pronounced: pet i pah

Actually, I was saying priority seems to be the number one determining factor in EVERYONE, children too. And it's not a bad thing either --- the time commitment required to build and then maintain a professional career is VERY costly. Most people decide they like dance but they don't like it enough to kill themselves over it. Just like I'm interested in reading astronomy results but not interested enough in it to do the research myself. Experience shows that some amateur adults --- when they put in that kind of time --- can make rapid progress toward a professional career. But that's not possible with 2 or 3 or 4 classes per week; if it's going to happen, it requires a de-stabilizing 6-10 classes per week plus attending rehearsals, all while finding the money to pay for it. On the other hand, I've observed that many people (again, regardless of age) who pay the price and really make it a priority in their lives eventually make some kind of career out of it. Here's what I mean: eighty percent of Joffrey School graduates go on to a professional career. That is one of the highest retention rates around; much higher than, for example, SAB. It's not because the training or the students at the Joffrey School are better (most would agree they're not). Rather, it's because the Joffrey graduates seem to have more of a desire to dance whatever the cost. In contrast, the SAB graduates tend to take more of an all-or-nothing approach --- if they don't get a good enough entry level position, they move on to another career.

In my observation, the number one reason most students don't make it to a professional level is a lack of total neurotic drive to do so. Watching our teenagers, I can tell the difference between the (very few) kids who are absolutely driven, and the rest of them --- who are truly enjoying the dancing and the social atmosphere, but who will likely never choose to make the sacrifices needed to attain professional level. It is even harder for adults to make these sacrifices, for two reasons: 1. Most of them who would have done so already did so as children. 2. Adults have other responsibilities in life. People dance with many goals in mind. For myself, I don't know how I would approach it differently if it were as a "hobby/recreational activity" versus a "career". Either way, the goal is to continue improving as a dancer. It breaks my heart to see professional dancers who have no interest in improving --- especially when those professionals are just a couple of years out of the academy. In performing arts, you have to put in the time to make the progress. In my observation, the further along you get, the more time you need to put in to make further progress. If you don't put in that (increasing) minimum, you find yourself stagnating, going nowhere, even going backward. For the student in that position --- at a fairly advanced level but not able to put in enough time to advance further --- I could not in good faith suggest that he/she continue "as a hobby" because that would mean being content with stagnation. I rather see the student either put in more time, or put in less time and go do something else in life. Or, I might look for ways that student can make progress in certain areas with a minimal time committment, acknowledging that other (important) areas might stagnate. As for myself: > I would like to know what they derive from the lessons. I derive many things from lessons --- continued progress as a dancer, continued progress in a professional career, and a great intellectual/physical experience of continued study of the shapes and movements of ballet. > Do they see themselves improve or do they stay at the same level? I have improved consistently every month, every season, every year. > Is it a "downer" to see the young students in the class move to a more advanced level? Actually, I have moved forward a lot faster than the young students. Three years ago, they were ahead of me. I was one of those lifelong dancers who (apparently in hindsight) had the talent but was still a LONG way from professional level and about a decade too old. Today, I am a professional dancer because I made a decision to do what it takes to get there. I was very lucky. I'm sure that many dance professionals out there would have told me to be content with ballet as a hobby. I probably would have believed them; but in hindsight, I think that would have been patronizing on their part because I have disproven them. Instead of telling me to be content with ballet as a hobby, my artistic director undertook to train me properly --- and that took a LOT of effort on both our parts. I cannot say how glad I am that he was enlightened and creative enough to take me seriously, to not write me off. That training has been successful. Today I have some of the best form in my company. I know that the further I go, the less important my late-blooming will be in terms of getting a job (until I reach the age I must retire, and then that is as far as I will ever get as a professional dancer). > Do they get tired of the classes? Do they get bored? No. Class is liturgy. The founder of modern Karate, on his deathbed, said "my only regret is not enough time. I'm only just now beginning to understand the forward punch [one of the most basic moves]." Ballet is the same way. If you truly delve into it and you have a geeky passion for that kind of stuff, you can never get bored. Do you REALLY understand plier? > Does it exhilarate them? Sometimes, I suppose. But I can be pretty grumpy on stage, even if I look like I'm having fun in the moment. That does not detract from my total love of the art. > It takes so much work; why do they do it? As I said before, because I have to. Frankly, my life would be a lot easier right now without a dance career. But to have one is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. And it changes you. I know that 20 years from now I'll look back on the experience and say "wow, I was a part of that". The fact that the company I dance for has already been nationally recognized but will likely only increase in reputation --- and I can help it do so by improving my dancing and in other ways --- only adds to that sense of accomplishment.

Overbred show dogs? I don't think ballets are very often ruined by high extensions. When was the last time you left the theater with the comment "It was nearly perfect, except for all those six-o-clock penches." If the ballet was bad, it was probably because of unimaginative choreography, frivolous or silly librettos, poor coaching, hokey acting, or endemic problems of morale in the company. None of these are the dancer's problem.

Take it from someone who has examined on-line ticketing systems --- if you're going to sell exact seats, you have to give up-to-the-minute information about which seats are and are not sold. You have to do real-time credit card processing. It's a lot easier just to collect credit card numbers and let someone manually process them. The Met's web site looks like a custom job. A web site that could sell individual seats would have cost them more.

There is a VERY interesting article in TIME magazine this week on regional theater. One thing it says is that often the theater is better outside of New York --- due to the heavy financial pressures constraining the shows in NYC.

Washington is the political capital of the United States. Tokyo is the political capital of Japan. What's the political capital of the world?

I think it's a stretch to say the economy is in "collapse". Collapse is what Germany experienced post-WWII, when millions were starving. This is recession, not collapse. Music has moved from live to recorded format. Pop music survives by changing all the time --- often simply for the sake of change. But when you can buy a great recording of just about any serious musical masterwork for $15 (or often less), that puts a dent in the live performance market. I think it would be a stretch to say we've distanced ourselves from European culture. We're actually very much like Europe. And I wouldn't be surprised if European orchestras are grappling with the same long-term issues --- after all, the Continent is not insulated from pop culture either.

It's not just where you look on the person, but which area of the stage you focus on. Often, different action is going on in different places. It's this aspect of dance that makes it so subjective to the viewer. Two people could see the same dance but be looking at completely different dancers and see completely different things. As a dancer, you must assume that SOMEONE out there sees just about everything you do.

Are we talking grand jete (straight legs) or grand saut de chat (bent legs to straight)? The goal of the two jumps is different. In the first, the goal is to leap high; in the second, it's to move the feet as far as possible away from each other. It won't necessarily be the highest jump possible.

One big difference between student and professional is whose interest you're looking out for. A professional dancer, as a paid employee, has an obligation to look out for the best interests of the company employing that dancer --- and the company has a duty to supply a worthy product to the audience. The audience comes first, then the company, then the professional dancer. As a dancer, you dance when and how the company needs you. With students, the money flows in the other direction. It is the school's duty to look out for the best interests of its students. Student performances exist primarily to benefit the students' development as dancers --- and only secondarily to help the school or to provide pleasure to the audience. This could have an effect in casting, for example. You might cast a student production in a way that gives everyone certain valuable experiences, even if it doesn't produce the best show overall. This distinction turned out to be the case in my experience. As an apprentice/student, to the extent that I was put on stage, I was never truly needed. The company had to hire just as many dancers with me around as without me; hence, I was adding only marginal value to the company although I was gaining experience. After I demonstrated in one (and only one) season that I could be used in ways that were truly beneficial to the company, I was promoted. As a professional, I am absolutely needed --- in the sense that if I quit, they would have to hire someone else. I question whether students are being exploited when they are no longer put in expendable positions --- when the company seems to NEED a certain number of students out on stage. I scoped around and found the issues of contention at: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-re...e/s_133790.html I think I'm leaning toward the union in this case. $150 per performance is a lot of money for a high school student; there are entire professional companies that don't pay much more than that. It's enough that students could end up with warped priorities --- putting the performance before their obligations in high school, for example. Unlike professionals --- who already have jobs --- these students cannot afford to discount the value of their academics. That's why there are child labor laws. It's also enough money that the company could feel it's actually employing the students --- and therefore no longer needs to look out for their best interests. ============================= * A reduction of the rehearsal schedule from 38 to 34 weeks, which would result in at least a 5 percent pay cut for dancers, Lopez-Henriquez said. * The reduction of the professional company to 23 dancers, a number Lopez-Henriquez calls "the lowest the Pittsburgh Ballet has ever been." Five company dancers will not return next year, and the ballet has no plans to replace them, she says. Instead, it plans to use students from the Pittsburgh Ballet Theatre school, most of whom are high school students. The students, who would be paid a stipend of about $150 per performance, presumably would dance in the corps in productions such as "Swan Lake." * Ballet management wants to stop matching contributions by union employees to a pension fund that is similar to a 401(k). The ballet currently pays 2 percent into a separate pension fund for the dancers. * An option that could to require dancers to pay for any increases in medical insurance.

Using students on-stage is common. I've seen it at NYCB, a tradition I'm sure started with Balanchine. Everyone sees it at Nutcracker. I saw it at Boston Ballet's Bayadere. My company does it as well. Some of the more advanced students can do the parts just as well as the corps dancers. The biggest issue for these students is the time required to rehearse a dance to show quality. Professionals can often go through that process faster --- and they have all day to do it as well. Students generally have academic school to worry about. Students might need more coaching as well. For these reasons, it's impossible to replace a major portion of the dancing with students. But if you have one scene that requires oodles of dancers --- the Wilis for example, or the Shades in Bayadere --- putting a few students in the scene is certainly a LOT cheaper than hiring additional dancers who won't really be needed for anything else. Maybe the management in this case, under budget pressure due to the recession, realized they could get away with fewer dancers for most of the scenes, and could use students for the small number of extra-large scenes. If done right, I don't think this will hurt the artstic standards of the company.

Hey, please keep your CK (or any other) tattoos off of MY arm

Mom... I would not call you biased. A belief in integration is not a bias. You have nothing to be ashamed of, and every reason to be proud of your children. The world is moving forward, becoming increasingly competetive with globalization. We have to choose one person over another all the time --- in hiring, education, housing, etc. The choices we make affect how we --- and our organizations --- will fare in that competition. More and more, people who make these choices over skin color --- rather than ability --- will simply be left behind. KFW... Some yes, some no. There's a common kind of racism that if you're an ethnic minority that you're supposed to be overwhelmingly interested in "your" culture; but that if you're white, you can partake in any culture you like. The truth is this is a free society, and anyone should be able to follow his or her own interests. An African-American studying German should be no more surprising than a British-American studying German. Another reason a place like DTH might be considered a preferred choice for the African American dancer is a fear of racism in other groups. This is a kind of ghettoization, and it can lead to abuse within the ghetto. Abuse is then justified by "we're the only people you've got, so you have to put up with us; the white people aren't going to give you the time of day." This type of abuse is only possible in a Separate but Equal system. White people can be abusive to white people; the same holds true in other ethnic groups as well. Actually, the reason is a lot simpler. African Americans only make up 12% of the population. So if you're an Afro-centric group that does not appeal to a broader audience, you've already cut your donor base by a whopping 88%. The numbers are actually worse, since most of the really wealthy people in the USA are white. On the dancer side of the coin, the numbers are also not favorable. If you only consider a fraction of the possible dancers for your group --- either only those that are black or only those that are white --- then you will not, on average, be able to hire as high quality dancers as an integrated dance company. The reason why is because the best dancers come in any color. If you're running a white-only company, then this kind of racism in hiring will hurt your company's quality, but only somewhat. After excluding all the minorities, you'll still have plenty of qualified applicants from which to choose. But if you're a minority-only company, you've already excluded 90% of your possible dancers even before the audition is posted. This is a well-known principle in finance --- the more you limit yourself apriori as to what you invest in, the worse returns you'll get. It is for this reason that separate but equal hurts minority artists and art groups a LOT more than majority artists and art groups. Integrated dance groups are the way to achieve the highest level of quality among dancers and the broadest appeal to the donor base. Interest in ballet among African-American children is certainly an issue, but not relevant here. The ballet schools can be thought of as a system. Put in 1000 children, get out 10 dancers a decade later. If you find that there's a difference in ratios in what comes out vs. what goes in, then you have a case for bias. For example, you might notice that 970 girls go in, along with 30 boys. Ten years later, you have 7 young ladies and 3 young men ready to be hired professionally. In this case, it's clear that the system is MUCH more favorable to men than to women. We can make this claim without regard to the relative level of interest in ballet between boys and girls. Because in looking at the kids entering the system, we're already considering boys who for whatever reason expressed interest in ballet. Men are certainly a minority in ballet --- a favored minority. But if you looked at African-American dancers, I'd expect you'd see the opposite trend. You'll probably see a SMALLER percentage of African-Americans coming out of the training system than going into it. That would be an indication of bias in the system against African-Americans; again, it has nothing to do with the relative levels of interest in ballet by the African and European communities. Look, the above arguments seem to be saying "African-Americans just don't care about ballet; there are no interested patrons and no interested donors, so there's nothing we can do." As I've explained in detail, I just don't buy that. Listen to the stories, you will begin to see just how hard it is.

We cannot point to DTH and say "see, there's no problem." That is a rehash of the "separate but equal" philsophy of the segregated South. The fact that DTH exists indicates that there WAS a problem at the time of its founding --- and problably still is. Its goal was to provide a place for classical dancers of color. The only reason that was needed was because of the discrimination going on in the mainstream ballet companies. "Separate but equal" is not the same as equal opportunity. Just compare the budget of DTH to NYCB. Ailey is a whole nother ball of wax. That company was founded on the choreographic genius of Alvin Ailey --- which in this case was heavily based in the African American experience. The company is a lot more ethnically diverse today that DTH because race was never its prime reason for existence to begin with.