Drew

3 hours ago, KayDenmark said:

I hope they select the best AD, and I'm not too concerned about that AD's gender. From the accounts I've heard, Jon Stafford and his team are a pleasure to work with and the workplace environment has been much more positive and relaxed than it was in Peter's days, at least before this incident broke. Poor married-to-a-man Craig Hall, doomed to be confused with the other married-to-a-woman Craig Hall as this unspools.

I'm also a bit concerned about the New York Times' report that the woman's lawyer "contacted City Ballet “to try to negotiate a payment from the company to settle the matter to avoid adverse publicity” but the company had “refused the demand.”

So if she'd received a payoff none of this would have gone public?  Hmmm. 

To me, it looks like Finlay was a problem and has been a problem for awhile. Why didn't they get rid of him? Union reasons, ADA (it was alleged in the lawsuit that he had substance problems, which are a disability), a desperate lack of male principals, or something else? He seems to have been the instigator in this ugly circle of picture-trading, although we clearly don't know the full story with so many dancers unnamed in the complaint.

If the woman's evidence is solid, she could have charged Finlay with a crime, or multiple crimes.

But instead she went to his employer (not her employer) and asked for money. When his employer refused, she and her lawyer released an incendiary (and according to the posters above) poorly-written document. 

L'historie just posted as I was finishing typing this. I'll go ahead and post anyway. But I think we have some related points.

If Waterbury has a right to sue--and by all indications she does--then why shouldn't she? and why wouldn't she? Likewise when it comes to reaching a financial agreement or "payoff" as you write. The fact is that if big organizations and, for that matter, individuals, don't suffer economical consequences--or face the possibility of suffering economical consequences--in situations like this, then they don't often change. I can think of few organizations in the world that I want to flourish more than New York City Ballet, but not at any and all moral costs.  Perhaps they did everything by the book and properly and bear no responsibility in this case...that seems to be their position. Well, then, let her sue...if she doesn't have evidence her suit may be thrown out of court. Even if she does have some evidence, then she--or rather her lawyer--has to convince a jury. (Criminal cases are also in some ways harder to prove than civil cases which is another reason to go the civil route.  And I don't think it's better for someone found guilty of these kinds of crimes to end up in prison than to end up in the poorhouse due to a lawsuit. That is, I assume Finlay would prefer not to face criminal charges.) 

And the hint that any of this publicity is somehow no big deal for her just doesn't seem likely to me. According to press reports, she already has faced vilification for making her original complaint to the company. (The article even suggested she had received threats though I found the language of the threats quoted sounded more like virulent insults--which I guess may well feel pretty threatening.)

It's very common for women who bring accusations, in turn, to be accused of "just being in it for the money." I daresay some are, but I wouldn't automatically insinuate (or assume) that to be the case every time or even most times someone looks for financial damages. And I think it's unfair to do so. Sure we need to hear Finlay's side of the story to come to any real judgment -- and maybe that of some others as well. But if some portion of what Waterbury is saying is true, then she has been treated very badly and should use every tool at her disposal (that she wishes to use) to get some kind of justice and peace.

6 minutes ago, wonderwall said:

I am pretty sure the "put up with Alex" in #61 is referring to Alexandra Waterbury and not Alexa Maxwell based on Finlay saying it, and the "referring to the fact that she was 19 years-old" would fit with Alexandra's age at that time. I don't think the sharing Alexandra with Amar and Alexa comment from Finlay was about giving photos to both of them but rather was more of a vulgar statement regarding sexually passing around his girlfriend (Alexandra)--or at least that is how I read it.

Very disappointing all around.

That all makes sense. (I did and do read this as an exchange--and not an edifying one--between the two men. Presumably if the lawsuit goes through, then more will come out about ... well... who knows?)

Lovely...I don't know if she wants to find a more "permanent" institutional position or not, but I would love there to be a way for her knowledge of the art--and of certain roles in particular--to be shared with more dancers.

6 hours ago, Fleurfairy said:

It would seem that Alexa Maxwell was also complicit given she was a recipient of photos of Waterbury. Dark days for City Ballet. 

I'm still puzzled. I didn't see this in the report. Maxwell's name was invoked in variously salacious ways in the emails or text messages.  The fact that in the message where Finlay offers to "share" Ms. Waterbury with Mr. Ramasar and Ms. Maxwell, Finlay immediately goes on to make an unpleasant remark about Maxwell, could indeed be interpreted as showing he did NOT think he was communicating with Maxwell, but only with Ramasar.  (I have no idea what went down, but am just not convinced that there is evidence Maxwell is "complicit.") [Edited hours later to add Wonderwall suggested below--convincingly to me--that I misread this section of document: I still don't think it's fair to make any pronouncements about Maxwell based on it.]

I worry about giving way to "pearl clutching," an expression I learned years ago from dirac on this very website, but I'm pretty revolted by the whole thing. And pretty skeptical that the current leadership (including the board) isn't part of the problem.

8 hours ago, Helene said:

There is a conflict in the two reports: the Daily News writes that one of the exchanges was between Finlay and and donor, while Gothamist describes the same exchange as among three male dancers. 

 

I just started reading the complaint--though I am going to have to stop to get some work done!--and oddly both versions are in the complaint itself. This seems to me...well...very careless lawyering...unless they really have two sets of emails both using the same crude comments in the same way. I'm hoping not...Though one is bad enough.

35 minutes ago, FITTB85 said:

 

From a close reading of the complaint and reviewing the support Amar/Lexi have been receiving from company members on Instagram I think there's more to the story.  I think there were more men involved who were not named in the complaint for various reasons; because Amar and Zach are being punished for something others may have been involved in I get the feeling Amar specifically is being treated as the guy taking the fall for some others.  

This, seems to me very speculative. Ramasar and Catazaro are leading dancers with the company--they are not easily replaceable, so the company has no institutional interest in suspending them for the actions of others. Quite the contrary.  Certainly, the person filing the suit is naming the people about whom she feels she has a case to make (evidence, emails etc.); either that or she should sue her lawyer for malpractice.

Will Ramasar and Catazaro continue to be supported by dancers now the fuller story begins to come out...? They may be ... I am sure the two of them (Finlay too)  must have many friends who admire and love them and want to support them, but unfortunately that kind of support by friends doesn't always have much to do with the hard cold facts of cases like this. Right now, we don't yet know what those hard cold facts are. And very probably many of the dancers don't yet know either. When not much is known it's easier for someone to say "but I respect him so much...but he's a wonderful guy" etc. (And indeed people can be wonderful and worthy of respect in many ways and still behave appallingly in others...)

Perhaps some dancers do know some more "inside dope"...but certainly I don't think much can be read into what we are reading online. We only know what the allegations in the suit are, and that in the wake of the company's investigation that Finlay resigned, that Catazaro and Ramasar were given suspensions for the Fall and in the latter case, the penalty seems quite minimal and with minimal consequences to the company, because he was not supposed to return to the company until January anyway. 

Are others involved? Will they be investigated? Who are the unnamed parties in the complaint?? these are unknowns and unknown unknowns...If this story confirms much of anything it's that Instagram makes a lousy source for trying to figure out what's really happening behind the scenes.

Regarding the artists and the art: I always especially liked Finlay's courtly manners onstage!!

3 hours ago, FauxPas said:

What I find telling is that the donor/board member(?) is not explicitly named nor are the other female victims other than Lexi Maxwell (who may have been complicit).

[...]

Based on everything I have read so far, I think speculative hints about Maxwell as "complicit" are very much uncalled for...she did write a generically supportive IG message to her boyfriend/partner when his suspension was first announced--one that said exactly zero about the actual case against him. That doesn't make her complicit with the kinds of activity described in the complaint. I also wouldn't agree that an email or emails discussing Maxwell, emails said in the complaint to have been written by Finlay and Ramasar, somehow implicate her as "complicit"--especially since they could be read as pointing in exactly the opposite direction. I haven't the faintest how serious the systemic problems at the company are, but still find this story demoralizing...to say the least.

9 hours ago, hiballet said:

so pity...

https://www.sommerballett.no/no/pedagogues/uliana-lopatkina/

I am not displeased to read Lopatkina is teaching a masterclass —though I could not quite figure out when this was happening or had happened — I hope she comes to do more work teaching and coaching (assuming she so wishes). She has a wealth of profound knowledge to share.... 

I just pre-ordered this!

The performance sounds wonderful! 

1 hour ago, BalanchineFan said:

As for the past, Baryshnikov and Kirkland's affair certainly blew up and that didn't seem to hurt ticket sales.

 

In my experience, it did hurt the quality of their partnership at some performances though not all. Did the earlier great performances together depend on the love affair? I'm not sure  what I believe about that--there were some great post-affair performances too--but in any case...I'm with Bruhn who said (paraphrasing) a great partnership should be a love affair on stage not a bad argument. (I thought the point was "on stage not off stage" and that  he might have been implying that offstage love affairs risk devolving into bad arguments on stage. But that could just be my interpretation.)

I loved and love Kirkland more than any other ballerina I have seen and she brought intense joy and more than joy to my ballet-going life. But I saw a couple performances with Baryshnikov that were, indeed, like bad arguments. (And it wasn't simply because one knew the rumors...I should think anyone watching the otherwise very beautiful Theme and Variations that was recorded can see her turn to meet his eyes at one point while he coolly and seemingly deliberately looks the other way. It doesn't exactly come across like two dancers who are on the same page.)  

NYCB? The last time I saw them--which was just this past spring--they were dancing spectacularly!  It testified to the company's artistic commitment and grit during a time of transition. I have faith that they can keep that up in the coming season too.  And yes, of course, it's inevitable some of the dancers are going to become involved with each other...even if I could surely wish the Kirkland/Baryshnikov partnership had gone differently.

I agree with Vipa too re the very mixed blessing of social media when it comes to sharing one's personal life.

I only have a spotty relation to dancers' social media (didn't know about Maxwell and Ramasar until reading Vipa's post or about Lovette's engagement to Finlay). I'm thinking I should cut back on what little I follow...

2 hours ago, rkoretzky said:

Mark Morris? 

Morris belongs to a very different generation--fighting different battles.

As others have expressed too...I feel great gratitude to Paul Taylor. For me Esplanade remains an all time touchstone of what can be done with a run and a walk. May he rest in peace.

Very sad. When I came to this site & saw Peter Frame's name flash up next to Ballet News/Issues--I thought 'please, please, don't let it turned out he has passed away..."

May he rest in peace....

15 minutes ago, vipa said:

Agreed, but we don't know if any dancers were the recipients of the emails and texts. All we know is that the individual who wrote the letter of complaint is not in the company. There is also the issue of (here's were my lack of knowledge shows) if a person from an organization sends an offensive email to someone else in  the organization, is the organization culpable? is there such a thing as private correspondence? Now that I think of it a suspension without pay, for the fall and Nutcracker seasons is not a really horrible punishment. Finlay resigning is another matter.

I also was thinking that the purpose of suspension without pay for Fall season was to try to find a "proportional" penalty. (Of course I don't have an opinion one way or another whether they did the right thing since I don't know what the complaint was. I guess I will go so far as to say that I don't believe the company would act entirely 'frivolously' in this matter...)

If codes of conduct exist and have been successfully defended in courts, then I suppose employees in certain jobs are losing some freedom in certain aspects of their (private) lives??  A player in the NFL can be suspended for smoking pot in his own home etc...

In this case the company leadership saw whatever communications they saw because there was a complaint. If the dancers feel their rights were violated, I assume (hope) there are procedures in place for them to appeal and/or they can sue the company. Or the complainant. (Though, for a variety of reasons having nothing to do with guilt or innocence they might not want to do so...)

42 minutes ago, miliosr said:

 

The skill set (Balanchine, primarily) for a New York City Ballet dancer isn't necessarily an advantage in finding work elsewhere, at least outside of the United States. Suzanne Farrell learned that when she left the company and then barely worked for a year. It was only when Maurice Bejart invited her to join his troupe in Belgium that she found steady work. (And going from Balanchinian neo-classicism to Bejartian theatricality was quite a leap stylistically.) Alexandra Ansanelli left City Ballet mid-career to join the Royal Ballet but I don't know that it was so easy to transition from Balanchine to Ashton and MacMillan (or that the experiment was particularly successful.)

Things are probably better now in that the Peter Martins productions -- love 'em or loathe 'em -- of Romeo and Juliet, Sleeping Beauty and Swan Lake would give a dancer a City Ballet a kind of calling card to European companies. But a dancer attempting to make the transition to Euro dance would still face a fairly big hurdle in terms of different styles and productions.

I don’t disagree about the issue of transition, but at any rate the company today is different than in Farrell’s day even beyond the Martins’ full lengths...They have danced Bigonzetti, Forsythe, Scarlett, and Preljocaj as well as Ratmansky and Wheeldon along the way.  It is not their bread-and-butter, but...they have shown what they can do with it. Which is a lot.

And I would say Ansanelli had substantial success at the Royal simply based on the fact that she was not brought in to the company as a principal—I think she came in as a soloist—but was promoted by them to principal. I saw her dance the first fairy variation in Sleeping Beauty with them not too long after she joined and thought she was gorgeous in it. Really memorable. Since she retired early for personal reasons she has publicly discussed, I don’t know that much can be concluded about her long term success with their bread and butter rep. (At least a few fans seemed to have nice things to say about her performances in A Month in the Country.)

Stiefel would be a more obvious example of someone who moved to other companies and other repertory with great success.

I think it may also just depend a lot on the dancer....

4 hours ago, ABT Fan said:

And, I don't understand why the other two would be suspended without pay till next year. If what they did was so bad, why weren't they fired? I'm not advocating for them to be fired, I'm just wondering what's the point of the suspension. I have a feeling they'll both resign (or "retire") and not return.

 

I would think that depending on the problem/offence there need to be penalties short of firing to address certain issues as well as firing for the most serious ones -- Abatt already mentioned this happens in the sports world. It happens in other professions as well.  (Of course, the way sports world determines what is more and less serious in terms of penalties to players often seems ludicrous to me--eg at one point smoking pot seemed to be viewed as a more heinous offense than knocking a woman unconscious...Still, in theory, the idea that some offenses merit firing and others lesser penalties seems right--or, at any rate, seems pragmatic to me.)

I can't speak for Catazaro or Ramassar -- or Finlay for that matter -- but even for very good dancers, a job at New York City Ballet is not to be lightly left behind, especially if someone has gotten into trouble for actions that might make other companies think twice about hiring them.  It must be one of the best if not the very best job for a male ballet dancer in the United States, not to say one of the best in the world.

4 hours ago, dirac said:

Simon is probably responsible for more great one-liners than anyone with the possible exception of Woody Allen, and I mean that as the highest of compliments.

I remember reading what must have been one of his last interviews and it mentioned that he was going “in and out.” I’m glad he’s been released from the prison of Alzheimer’s by the old man’s friend. Godspeed.

He didn’t need words to be hilarious, either, per this skit he wrote with his brother Danny, another very funny man.

I didn't know about the alzheimer's...may he rest in peace...

12 hours ago, Balletwannabe said:

 

Also no offense to Bouders parenting style, but I think she would have to drastically change her schedule if she were AD. She seems to have her daughter with her a lot and I don't see how that would work as AD. 

 

Any parent in a high powered job makes scheduling adjustments—and when people change jobs they may well change those adjustments. I do find women with children tend to get much more scrutiny than men with children in these situations. IF Bouder wanted and applied for the job—she may not, for many reasons—and her parenting style became part the conversation, then that would be troubling. As for it becoming a consideration by the actual hiring team—I assume that would be illegal. Fortunately one can hope and trust that would not happen. (If it did, then it would be excellent evidence of problems for women seeking leadership positions in ballet.)

3 hours ago, FPF said:

 

I think that Stiefel having left NYCB for ABT because he was more interested in their rep is problematic for this position. 

 

I have been puzzled at seeing Stiefel's name mentioned for just this reason. Especially since he left quite early in his career--

Thank you for posting. All sounds wonderful, but one thing that leaps out to me is Cornejo and Cojocaru dancing an excerpt from Ashton's Rhapsody. I always thought ABT should have have acquired that ballet for Cornejo when he was at the height of his career and alternate casts might have included other top male dancers who have since retired or departed. Any opportunity to see Cojocaru is a treasure.

Looking forward to reading about all of these programs.

Edited to add: I have tickets to see Dance Theatre of Harlem about two weeks after they dance the Lopez-Ochoa premier in New York--their program in Atlanta has not, as far as I can tell, been announced anywhere, but I'm hoping they bring that work with them.

R.E.S.P.E.C.T.    

May she rest in peace... 

3 hours ago, vendangeuse said:It is very exciting! I admit I relocated to New York somewhat reluctantly from where I was previously, but discovering all the wonderful dance performances that happen here has made me love the city much more.

I saw two ABT performances in their 2017 Met season, Swan Lake and Onegin. I loved Swan Lake, but Onegin was what really drew me in. By chance I happened to attend a performance where David Hallberg was dancing Onegin and I think it was the impression his dancing left on me that encouraged me to seek out more performances when the fall came around. Then was lucky enough to catch two of the programs at City Center's Fall for Dance,  which led me to seek out other companies and venues beyond ABT and Lincoln Center. (Though I still find ABT performances to be the most consistently enjoyable, no matter what is being performed or who is dancing.)

I've been to NYCB a few times, and my feelings about that company are more mixed. Often the programs I want to attend include at least one dance choreographed by Justin Peck. His work doesn't appeal to me as much as other things I've seen, but he is growing on me. The last Peck I saw was Pulcinella Variations and I did enjoy that much more than other Peck works I had seen prior. Can't help but wonder if its the kind of thing I will come to appreciate as I learn more about ballet in general.

I also love the Joyce, but again, my luck here has been pretty hit-or-miss. I did very much enjoy seeing the Barak Ballet perform there back in July, and I am looking forward to the Sarasota Ballet this week.

Thank you for the warm welcome!

I believe NYCB is dancing Balanchine’s Jewels in the upcoming season—that’s three very different, but (I would argue) still interrelated  Balanchine works on one program —as perhaps you know: Emeralds to Faure, Rubies to Stravinsky, and Diamonds to Tchaikovsky. No other choreographers on the program. It is a  story-less full-length ballet, but not without drama and, depending on how you look at the ballets, they do  imply stories or human interactions of various kinds. Many people and companies consider Jewels as Balanchine at his most accessible and broadly appealing, while it is still a rather sophisticated work to substantive music. Taste is very personal and I can’t know whether you would like any or all of Jewels, but if you are still learning about New York City Ballet, then I would recommend you give it a try...

Welcome to Balletalert! How exciting to have become hooked on ballet in New York City--only a few places in the world are as great for experiencing ballet -- and other kinds of dance as well. Please share your thoughts and responses when you are able...