Drew

There has been talk about this kind of merger before--I remember reading about it several years ago--so Gergiev has presumably been looking out for an opportunity to make it happen. Urin signing a document calling for peace (though worded in a rather 'humanitarian' vein) may have created that opening. Gergiev's power wouldn't be internationally what it would have in the pre-war world, but it would still be a lot of power. But I also notice that in the translation of Putin's statement he seems to be saying that a decision has not yet been made...so perhaps this is trial balloon of some kind ...? or is the translation misleading? As you may know, Brazil has taken a neutral stance on the war--even as Brazilian dancers at Mariinsky and Bolshoi decided to leave Russia--so it would not be a surprise if the school hasn't been disrupted for now. One imagines, too, that Gergiev, if he gets the sought after position, will want to maintain what international standing/influence Russia has when it comes to soft power. Though of course I'm hardly an expert! https://www.reuters.com/world/brazil-wont-take-sides-over-russias-invasion-ukraine-foreign-minister-2022-03-08/

Young twenties seems very young to me. Anyway, by every account i have ever read, Khoreva has an eminent, wealthy father who has played a big part in her career. I can see for myself how very polished her social media has been--professional quality photography etc. At one point, well over a year ago, she posted on Instagram that "friends" run her youtube channel, so text on the youtube channel is not necessarily directly from her at all times. Or at least it hasn't always been. Personally, reading this story about her channel, I think she is being badly advised and/or her channel is being badly run by her "friends" -- It's not an excuse but it is a context. And if I admire a Smirnova so very much it's because I don't think it's easy for anyone at any age (even a "star" married to a Goldman Sachs employee) to think, speak, and act against the very society that cradles and adores them and has always been their home. Even more so when that society is a de facto police state. There is a huge amount happening right now that we won't begin to understand for years and even decades.

Yes....none of substance.... Challenged on the fact that he himself didn't stop working in Russia after they annexed Crimea--a challenge made in comments on Instagram written in response to his post--Ratmansky himself responded: "I never supported the annexation of the Crimea. But yes, I wish I understood better what has happened back then." He also says that he has asked both the Bolshoi and the Mariinsky to suspend his repertory. The full exchange is interesting and --for those who haven't seen it already -- here is a link; you have to scroll down the comments to get to it: https://www.instagram.com/p/CbbXrlHKjTs/

Ratmansky's initial post was expressed as a response to Baryshnikov and opened with a long tribute to Baryshnikov and his support of Ukraine. He re-posted it as a general statement on his own FB page without that tribute as has been cut and pasted by others above. As you probably saw, the part that I was reflecting on and which concerns "even" people who protest Putin is quoted in my earlier post.

Though Macaulay admires Ratmansky's statement, his own attitudes are different and that comes out subtly even in the way he summarizes Ratmansky's points which, in fact, slight softens them: . [Edited to add: in the comments to his post, Macaulay makes his distance from Ratmansky clearer than in the initial post.] Though Macaulay summarizes Ratmansky's argument saying Russians do have access to real information and can easily find out what is happening if they wish to do so, Macaulay himself still ends his statement by recalling the role of "propaganda" and "confused patriotism" --as if to once again remind people that Russians may not always have access to real information. This is not Ratmansky's position in the FB post Macaulay is referring to (quoted below)... Likewise Macaulay acknowledges the importance of Ratmansky's critique of Russian silence as often a mask for Putin support while ALSO insisting that Western observers who say that silence=consent from the comfort of their armchairs are speaking "coarsely" and "heartlessly." Moreover, I think Ratmansky goes farther than a critique of silence as consent. After discussing many who have openly and loudly aligned themselves with Putin over the years, Ratmansky adds; "Yes, there were those who were not involved, and others who even protested. And it seems fair that these artists/sportsmen should be given chances to perform/compete in the West. But in reality it's a more complex issue. ... Russia is now engulfed in a military patriotic frenzy. I know that many of the Bolshoi and Mariinsky dancers, whom I adore and with whom I happily worked for more than 20 years, sharing my heart, inspiration and knowledge, support Putin and his crimes in Ukraine. I don't beleive they are unaware that Ukrainian cities are being shelled and destroyed, thousands of civilians killed and millions displaced. I don't beleive [sic] they can't get true information..." My interpretation of the part in bold is that we have to take seriously Ratmansky's reference to "others who even protested." The latter don't get a pass from him either. (And that seems a bridge too far for Macaulay who silently leaves that bit out of his summary of what Ratmansky wrote.) It's not clear to me why Ratmansky takes that position: perhaps because he thinks most protesters have not gone far enough? Or perhaps because, short of fleeing Russia, he thinks that when artists and athletes "represent" Russian art they de facto shore up Putin's and Russia's prestige EVEN IF they oppose Putin's war? perhaps because, as with any other kind of sanctions, he believes that cutting off Russian artists/athletes has to be thoroughgoing to be effective -- even at the cost of hurting those who may not deserve it? Perhaps because he thinks many of the antiwar statements have been blandly humanitarian but not actually anti-Putin? I don't know. If I am honest with myself, then I think my attitudes on these issues are closer to Macaulay's ever so slightly softer position or even Baryshnikov's quite different position--though mostly I feel weighed down by uncertainty and the experience of "propaganda" in all directions. But I know I certainly didn't stop attending Farrell's performances just because I read an interview in which she ooh-ed and ahhed over what a Ballet Fan Henry Kissinger was and, to keep things from going too much off the rails, let's just say that, in my eyes, Putin isn't the only war criminal in the world. But I do find reading Ratmansky very salutary...He obviously sees himself, indeed he IS, a warrior in the "information" wars.... Edited to add: As noted above, in a comment added to his post, Macaulay makes his distance from Ratmansky and Baryshnikov clear: "Rather than rushing to think either man [Baryshnikov or Ratmansky] is right, we should consider the conditions that may be most effective in freeing Russian artists of the pro-Putin views that may seem to them as appealing as the outdated British imperialism of my boyhood."

Hope he has a great and fulfilling career. His shortened ballet career was a loss for the art.....

Unlikely as it seems, I'm reviving this thread because Nedak joined Atlanta Ballet (announced last year actually--I wasn't paying a lot of attention since they weren't dancing much and I certainly wasn't attending). He is dancing Albrecht with them this week as they finally premier the Giselle that was planned for 2020. For various reasons, I'm not able to attend. I'm sorry to miss it. I can't know, but I imagine he is under some emotional strain under the circumstances.

I'm slapping my head....the sarcasm should have been obvious to me....

Good press for five minutes, but as I know you know, she should not be being intimidated by threats into doing anything. And of course ‘Russian Ballet’ refers to a whole history of ballet....it’s not just about nationality, ethnicity, or where someone was born. The episode is nothing compared to the horrors being visited on Ukraine by Russia—I am sure no-one on this thread needs to be reminded of that— but when the U.S., the country I live in, has gone down this route during past wars and international crises (including Covid), it has never ended well. Better to speak up when it IS still a trivial problem.

Amen .... Which, goodness knows, does not change the horror that is happening in Ukraine ....and the terror many of us feel listening to what is coming out of the Kremlin....

I also saw that terrible news--about the actress only a few minutes ago on Twitter--and have been publicizing the first story (in my case on my social media, not here on Balletalert) ...

Who would disagree with what @pherank has written?...Not me for sure. So why did I post about the lounge? Even though I rather thought I might be criticized? The way war causes people to make small, inconsequential acts of ugliness even on (what one believes strongly is the) right side is not something one always has to ignore or like--and indeed I don't think it is something one should always ignore. I judge this renaming, however trivial, to be just such an act. And such gestures are not always inconsequential insofar as they contribute to building up the atmosphere that leads up to much more problematic acts. (Talk of throwing Russian students out of the U.S. is already underway. A discussion that seems to me quite premature.)....I've expressed myself elsewhere on what I agree is the real issue--and one on a vastly different scale--the destruction being visited on Ukraine and the threats beyond. On this website, which is a ballet talk website, when the renaming of an opera house lounge came up I expressed myself on that.

Hmmm...it would very much surprise me.

I am trying to decide just how depressing I find it to read this story about the renaming of the Russian Lounge at Kennedy Center. Fundraising experts perhaps can tell me: Is it typical to let a space name lapse when the donor's original arrangement expires? If so, then that is one thing and I can live with it even if I find it dispiriting. But otherwise I find it an unpleasant 'wartime' kind of gesture and I can't help but think it's the sort of thing that gives life to those who might believe Putin's claim that the world is out to "cancel" Russia.

Best of good fortune to Smirnova at the Dutch National Ballet. Whatever her privileges and protections in life, I believe her statement against the war took some guts--it's more direct than many such statements have been--and I admire her for it. Interested to read that she admires Van Manen's choreography because from what I have seen of his work (almost entirely video) I can very much picture her in it. Also, as I understand, Lezhnina is a ballet mistress at Dutch National Ballet--that seems like a potentially excellent coach for her. Glad to read the company has also taken on some Ukrainian dancers and wishing success, too, to Caixeta. And, oh yes @California! Please Kennedy Center pay attention--artistically for sure and also--this is a story you can use to sell tickets!

It has been wonderful to read about this event--thank you to everyone posting....

I had not thought so when I first read those posts, but perhaps...who knows? I suspect this has all been traumatic enough for many of them from other parts of the world who have built careers in Russia that those who are higher profile and have the option may prefer to get farther away if they can. I myself am not persuaded the war will expand beyond Ukraine, but...

I knew about Tissi but not about the others -- though it's not a surprise. (I wonder what Xander Parish will do.) I hope all of them find great opportunities elsewhere.

More deep memory of 20th-century ballet lost. Crisp certainly seems to have had a full, rich life--may he rest in peace.

It's a call to "all parties to the conflict" to sit down and negotiate for peace--as if "all parties" were in a symmetrical relation to each other--and the opposition to war remains generalized. It may still be understood as a critique of Putin's policies--probably (?)--but I find myself unsure how exactly to interpret this kind of statement. Russia experts may feel more confident and wish to weigh in....(I do not feel Russian artists are under automatic obligation to fall on their swords to protest Putin's war--that is, I feel uncomfortable being moralistic about that...) What Hilaire has done seems to me something very strong and very clear.

Thank you for posting!

Unfortunately, it already hasn't been. It's way too late for this to be a fair Olympics (or a fair European Nationals -- I forbear comment on the Russian National Championships). Every clean skater out there is being treated unfairly. Arguably, every Olympic athlete who has been banned for a doping violation has been treated unfairly. And adults giving heart medication to a youngster who, according to what they themselves have been saying, does not have a heart problem can be put at the top of the list for lacking compassion for the skater(s) placed in their care. (For athletes who do have heart problems--there is a mechanism to get permission to used banned medications....) The main culprits yes...

Did watch the Ladies Short as covered by NBC in Primetime. By far and away my favorite skater was Kaori Sakamoto--Hoping she pulls off a spectacular upset on Thursday or at least ends up with a medal....

Yes: Johnny Weir spoke about the same things. I'm willing to believe that a lot is different in Russia especially with the coaches controlling so much of their skaters' lives outright--but I don't believe Valieva was simply unaware of the need to be sensitive about what goes into her body. She may well have been lied to by her coaches, but they now appear to have her lying--which is poisoning her in yet another way. (If Valieva had been sent home, then I'd likely have been rooting for her to come back clean and do well in the future. And I'd probably even have been okay with a shorter suspension due to age especially if the role of those around her was also being looked into seriously--and not simply by Russia's own doping agency. But...as it is...)

The rumored explanation [edited to add: actually not a rumor anymore] also made me uncomfortable to say the least--I find it implausible especially from an athlete who has regularly been subjected to drug testing throughout her career and thus knows something about the importance of what goes into her body. (When Tara Lipinski and Johnny Weir were discussing the decision, and talking about their own awareness of doping issues when still very young competitors, Tara said that when she was in a competition she wouldn't touch a poppy-seed bagel--a line that would be funny under other circumstances.) One imagines the "grandfather" story was concocted for her by the team around her--especially since 'I was taking vitamins given to me by my coaches' would implicate them--but unfortunately, her putting it forward, very much implicates her in the corruption. Again--she is young and is doing presumably what she is being told or encouraged to do and perhaps what she herself thinks "everyone" does --I still have some sympathy for her as a person and as a very young person who is, in many ways, a pawn...but the whole thing is disheartening. And having read @Helene's post... Brava to the marvelous Irina Rodnina!! I remember her as a great champion...and now I can add to those memories, because taking the position she has can't be popular or easy in Russia.