Alexandra

Good to read some good news for a change! Thanks for posting that, Jane.

Thank you for that, Jane. The huge funding cut fits with the reports a few months ago that the company was in trouble financially. And doing video work fits, too, because that's as independent as a choreographer can get. He doesn't have to worry about pleasing a board, nor a general audience.

I'd be curious to know what you think wasn't working, LMCTech. I've thought of ABT as being rather sturdy in the management department. What did you see amiss, and that needed restructuring? (I don't mean to imply anything negative about restructuring.)

I agree -- there are a lot of holes in the ballet music repertory. Write away! I don't know of a full-length recording of either Corsaire or Don Q. If anyone else does, please pipe up!

Maybe Rummy will jump on board. Are they preparing for an invasion of Queens? Or just to identify ("smoke 'em out") and acquire more ballerinas from other companies? I'm sure all this is just a matter of wording -- the Officer of Artistic Language being on holiday. I think it's not a bad idea for a ballet company to have a department of Human Resources (especially if it's of modest size) and a very good one to have a dancer involved in management.

That would be a nice figure to know, wouldn't it? (I'd also like to know the company's "aggressive plans.")

I didn't say that all European companies had this model, but "the European companies that took on the one-choreographer model". I think the major European companies (not all big cities, since Copenhagen was counted as one of these) were institutions rather than one-man shows. They may have had only one choreographer, with assistants, but they weren't auteur companies, the way American modern dance companies were. (I know there were German modern dance companies built along the same lines, but for a variety of reasons, they didn't develop.) In London, weren't the first modern dance companies -- London Contemporary Dance Theatre, Ballet Rambert -- more collective than auteur? We've never had a successful LCDT; there were a few attempts at repertory modern dance companies but they didn't last. The idea of models has interested me for awhile, because when I started looking at dance companies' histories, it seemed there were some that were institutions and others that were not, and that there's an institutional model, where a repertory and aesthetic is consistent and develops slowly over time, and an ex-institutional one, where the company reflects the tastes and expertise of the Artistic Director at that specific period in time. (In ballet, the great example of the latter was Robert Joffrey, I think, and it's become the model that more and more American companies are adopting -- and it's spreading.)

This press release just in from ABT: AMERICAN BALLET THEATRE ANNOUNCES NEW MANAGEMENT Lewis Ranieri, Chairman of the Board of Governing Trustees of American Ballet Theatre, today announced a number of management changes including the appointment of a Chief Financial Officer, a Director of Human Resources, the designation of a Chief Operating Officer, a reorganization of the office of the Executive Director and the appointment of a Special Advisor to the Chairman and President. Mr. Ranieri explained that the purpose of the reorganization is to put in place the senior team, which will execute the agenda of American Ballet Theatre over the next several years. Mr. Ranieri became Chairman of the Board of Governing Trustees effective August 1, 2002, along with Robin Neustein who became President at that time. "American Ballet Theatre is mobilizing for a great future. ABT's mission is to create, present and preserve the excitement of classical dance on the world stage through performances and educational programming of the highest quality. To ensure ABT achieves these aspirations, we are reorganizing and adding resources -- placing the right people in the right roles by matching talent to challenges," said Mr. Ranieri. Executive Director Wallace Chappell will shed his operating responsibilities to focus full time on strategic objectives in the newly created role of Director of Strategic Initiatives, reporting to the Chairman and President. Mr. Chappell will continue to serve as a member of the Board of Governing Trustees and as a member of the Executive Committee. He will also become Co-Chairman of the Board's Strategic Planning Committee. Of his new role, Mr. Chappell said, "I look forward to helping ABT realize its strategic mission and aggressive goals." Elizabeth Harpel Kehler will step in as Executive Director and will assume Mr. Chappell's operating responsibilities. Ms. Kehler has been a member of ABT's Board of Governing Trustees since 1998 and is a member of the Executive Committee. Ms. Kehler holds an MBA from Columbia University and a BA from Harvard. She previously worked in banking at Lehman Brothers and Bankers Trust Company. Ms. Kehler, who has been a Vice President of Ballet Theatre Foundation, has previously chaired ABT's Strategic Planning Committee, PR and Marketing Committee, the Family Day event, and currently serves as Secretary to the Board of Governing Trustees. Mr. Ranieri added, "We are delighted that ABT has the full-time service of such a talented executive as Liz Kehler." Ms. Kehler said, "ABT has an outstanding board, a dedicated staff and some of the finest dancers in the world led by Artistic Director Kevin McKenzie. I look forward to working with all of them in my new role, and I especially look forward to ABT's fall 2002 season at City Center." Mark Robinson will become the Chief Financial Officer for American Ballet Theatre. Mr. Robinson, a Certified Public Accountant, most recently served as Chief Operating Officer for The Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center and was CEO and Executive Director of GMHC from 1992 through 1998. Nancy Fleeter, currently General Manager for ABT, will assume the additional title of Chief Operating Officer. Ms. Fleeter, whom Mr. Robinson succeeds as CFO, joined ABT as Director of Finance in 2000 and was promoted to the position of General Manager in October 2001. She has previously held positions in finance and business at the Los Angeles Philharmonic and the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Mr. Robinson will report to Ms. Fleeter. Susan Gottlieb is joining American Ballet Theatre in the newly created position of Director of Human Resources. Ms. Gottlieb was most recently the Senior HR Generalist for the Marsh & McLennan Family Relationship Management Program and has held HR and recruiting positions at UBS Warburg, AG, and Price Waterhouse Coopers LLP. "With ABT's growth and the increasing complexity of its operations, Ms. Gottlieb will fill an important role in our management eam," said Mr. Ranieri. Susan Jaffe, who joined ABT in 1980 and retired as a Principal Dancer in June of this year, will serve in the newly created position of Advisor to the Chairman and the President. "Susan Jaffe's broad experience at the pinnacle of classical dance and her long association with ABT will make her a valuable resource as ABT moves forward in this exciting, challenging and rewarding period of our evolution," said Ms. Neustein. Mr. Ranieri emphasized, "American Ballet Theatre is committed to its role as America/s national ballet company. We are enthusiastic about our preeminent role in presenting classical dance to the widest possible audience."

I liked the right to make unpopular work idea, too. I think the European companies that took on the one-choreographer model made a mistake. I usually like, and nearly always admire, Pina Bausch's work a lot, but if I lived in Wuppertal, I think I'd be screaming for something else within a year. Forsythe and Bausch are working like American modern dance choreographers -- I want to do what I want to do; I have a vision -- more than the European institutional model, Balanchine's "I'm a cook and I make something for everybody." I think you need both, but I humbly suggest our model is more workable. In New York, Forsythe would find an audience -- and probably a fairly large one; in the postmodern dance world, he'd be accessible. In Frankfurt, he'll always be fighting the people who really want to see Romeo and Juliet.

Well, we certainly wouldn't want any artist to be forced to pursue an incorrect telos (do you think this was a translation from the German?) There are several interesting aspects to this news (aside from the What Really Happened one, which I think we should avoid, since we don't know). What I think he's saying is that right now he wants to have his own company, not a city or state institution -- and I'd second that. Do others read it that way? Also -- and we've discussed this before, regarding Forsythe's statement that after he dies, he wants his work to die with him -- what happens to his work? It's a problem that dates back to Diaghilev: when Fokine left, he thought he could take his work with him, but found he didn't own it. The modern dance model is "I am the company." It's inconceivable that Paul Taylor would leave the Paul Taylor Dance Company to form, say, Paul's Dancers, and have to worry about what happens with his work. And maybe Forsythe wants to go in such a different direction that past work would be a hindrance to that. Frankfurt Ballet has been more a European phenomenon than an American one. The company does not often perform here. About 15 years ago, when Forsythe was The Next Great Choreographer, lots of companies performed his works. After he had his own company and didn't need, nor have the time, to freelance, he hasn't been an active presence in American ballet, although he has many, many imitators. What happens now?

This is from this morning's Dance Insider, a letter from William Forsythe about his decision to step down in Frankfurt. http://www.danceinsider.com/

I have a vague memory of going to a fundraiser for the Virginia Ballet (Oleg Tupine's company) nearly 20 years ago and being shown a color film from the '40s or '50s of Gayaneh. My most striking memory is that of the ballerina's entrance -- on a horse! Beat the dickens out of the sword dance. So this may be one of the (probably) dozens and dozens of Soviet-era ballet films which, we live in hope, may be released on video one day. Thanks, rg, for answering, and a very special thank you for graciously agreeing to keep an eye out on this forum. We will all benefit greatly from your knowledge.

After you've been watching dance for awhile, you begin to see it everywhere. But I think there's a professional hand behind a new Saturn commercial, which shows "ordinary people" commuting. No cars, just people. Stopping for a friend, opening a car door (lots of gesture; I wouldn't call it mime). It reminds me of the dozens and dozens of "found movement" pieces I watched in the 1970s, except this one is very orderly, and very mainstream. (The population is not diverse, either demographically or somatically.) But it's site specific -- oh, how they would have loved this in the Judson days. An entire 8-lane highway, filled with dancers, nicely blocked, too. Anyone else see this one?

Often very small companies have a very small, but loudly devoted, following. I don't know whether that's so in this case -- but I'm sure that there is a lot of competition for funding in the Bay area.

Thank you, Leigh!!!

Here's a press release from the Graham Company: August 23, 2002 (New York, NY)? The Martha Graham Center of Contemporary Dance is pleased to announce that a Court decision has been issued today establishing the ownership of the choreography created by Martha Graham and related sets and costumes. The Honorable Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum of the Southern District of New York issued a decision confirming that the Martha Graham Center owns the overwhelming majority of Martha Graham's dances: the Center (Defendant) owns fifty-four works; 10 works are in the public domain; 5 works are owned by commissioning entities; and the Plaintiff (Mr. Protas) has been declared owner of one dance. The 110-page decision confirms that Martha Graham assigned the majority of her choreographic works to the Center and that the bulk of those remaining were created by Martha Graham as an employee of the Center which she herself created. While the Board of Trustees of the Center is pleased with this decision, it is important to note that dance companies can and do make arrangements with choreographers establishing that ownership of the dance(s) created by the choreographer resides with the choreographer. George Balanchine and other choreographers made such arrangements. Martha Graham chose not to. Five of the dances were commissioned by third parties in or prior to the 1950s. As to those commissioned-dances the Court indicated that the third parties may have some rights. The decision details the extensive documentary evidence and testimony of more than a dozen witnesses supporting the enter's ownership. Indeed The Court found that Mr. Protas' own lawyer had elicited testimony from a former Board member confirming the Center's ownership. The Court also found, as argued by the Center, that ten of the 70 dances at issue have now entered the public domain in the United States (the sets and costumes relating to these works were found to be owned by the Center)1. The Martha Graham Center is very pleased that the ten dances found to be in the public domain will be available to the public for study and performance. The decision also recognized that Martha Graham either assigned all of her theatrical properties (including sets and costumes) to the Center or that the Center otherwise paid for those sets and costumes. The Court also found that Ronald Protas had a technical "renewal right to the copyright" of a single dance. The Court found, however, that the Center owns the set for that dance. The Court stated that "After listening to [Mr. Protas] evasive and inconsistent testimony and observing his demeanor" it found that he was not a credible witness. The Court also found that Mr. Protas "profited mproperly at the defendants' expense and did not act 'with an eye single to the interests' of the defendants to whom he owed a fiduciary duty." Finally, the Court stated that in Mr. Protas' "desire to undermine the Center's ownership of the works, sets and costumes, Protas did not ccurately inform the Board of the underlying facts." The Court awarded the Center more than $240,000 for Mr. Protas' improper licensing of works actually owned by the Center and for selling the Center's property to the Library of Congress. Francis Mason, Chairman of the Board of the Martha Graham Center stated: "We rejoice in Judge Cedarbaum's decision confirming our ownership or the public's ownership of the choreography created by Martha Graham as well as that the Center owns all sets and costumes. This decision is particularly timely in light of our impending move back to Martha and the School's old premises that have now been completely renovated. We have an exciting two-week season commencing at the Joyce Theatre on January 21, 2003 and could not be happier to put this very difficult chapter behind us." A copy of the decision can be found at http://home.earthlink.net/~gsmltd/default.htm

Ken, "A Farewell to Music" is a new work by a choreographer with whom Farrell has worked in Florida. I'd posted a review to it somewhere a few weeks ago on this thread. It will give you at least some idea of the piece. http://www.balletalert.com/forum/showthrea...rewell+to+Music

A letter, jointly signed by dance critic Minday Aloff and ballerina Allegra Kent, posted with permission of the senders: 2 August 2002 Ms. Caroline Miller Editor, New York Magazine 444 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10022 Dear Ms. Miller: The news that New York has dismissed its dance critic, Tobi Tobias, and dropped the dance column altogether for budgetary reasons is an alarming surprise. It is difficult to believe that a magazine devoted to the city of New York, which both produces and hosts more dance--and a wider variety of dance styles and traditions--than any other metropolis in the world, will no longer have a dance critic. Many magazines are suffering in today's economic climate and finding that they must reduce space for arts coverage. However, New York is a special type of magazine. It purports to key in its readers on how to survive, and sometimes how to thrive, in the city. Dance is, as you know, one of the strongest cultural offerings here. Admittedly, dance companies are not in a position to take out a lot of advertising. However, the practice, now common, for magazines and newspapers to use ads as an index to how much editorial space should be accorded a given subject is one of the reasons that readers have come to distrust the cultural coverage of the media in general. In pleading economic woes as a reason for canceling the dance column, New York exemplifies this short-sighted and questionable approach. Furthermore, its dance columnist is one of the most well-respected dance critics in the country. Although Ms.Tobias's views can be tough and sometimes controversial--like those of the well-respected dance critic Marcia B. Siegel, who preceded her in her post at New York--she has covered her beat with honor, demonstrating a concern for high standards, passion for both the art of dancing and for the people who practice it, and consistent honesty. Readers know that what she publishes directly reflects what she thinks; and her colleagues can attest to the fact that what she writes is congruent with what she says in conversation. This kind of integrity is rare in criticism overall today, and it would seem from New York's move to dismiss her that she is being punished for practicing, as an adult of considerable learning and experience in her field, exactly those values one tries to instill in one's children. It is our hope that New York will reconsider its decision and return its dance column and its dance critic to its pages. Sincerely, Mindy Aloff Barnard College Allegra Kent Former Principal Dancer, NYCB

A letter, jointly signed by dance critic Minday Aloff and ballerina Allegra Kent, posted with permission of the senders: 2 August 2002 Ms. Caroline Miller Editor, New York Magazine 444 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10022 Dear Ms. Miller: The news that New York has dismissed its dance critic, Tobi Tobias, and dropped the dance column altogether for budgetary reasons is an alarming surprise. It is difficult to believe that a magazine devoted to the city of New York, which both produces and hosts more dance--and a wider variety of dance styles and traditions--than any other metropolis in the world, will no longer have a dance critic. Many magazines are suffering in today's economic climate and finding that they must reduce space for arts coverage. However, New York is a special type of magazine. It purports to key in its readers on how to survive, and sometimes how to thrive, in the city. Dance is, as you know, one of the strongest cultural offerings here. Admittedly, dance companies are not in a position to take out a lot of advertising. However, the practice, now common, for magazines and newspapers to use ads as an index to how much editorial space should be accorded a given subject is one of the reasons that readers have come to distrust the cultural coverage of the media in general. In pleading economic woes as a reason for canceling the dance column, New York exemplifies this short-sighted and questionable approach. Furthermore, its dance columnist is one of the most well-respected dance critics in the country. Although Ms.Tobias's views can be tough and sometimes controversial--like those of the well-respected dance critic Marcia B. Siegel, who preceded her in her post at New York--she has covered her beat with honor, demonstrating a concern for high standards, passion for both the art of dancing and for the people who practice it, and consistent honesty. Readers know that what she publishes directly reflects what she thinks; and her colleagues can attest to the fact that what she writes is congruent with what she says in conversation. This kind of integrity is rare in criticism overall today, and it would seem from New York's move to dismiss her that she is being punished for practicing, as an adult of considerable learning and experience in her field, exactly those values one tries to instill in one's children. It is our hope that New York will reconsider its decision and return its dance column and its dance critic to its pages. Sincerely, Mindy Aloff Barnard College Allegra Kent Former Principal Dancer, NYCB

Please do not become distracted by Miller's FIFTH version of her standard response, when it suddenly occurred to her that it sounded better to say she was replacing Tobias rather than cutting dance reviews. If that had been the intention, that would have been the initial statement. It was not. It took two weeks for the position to evolve to the "replace" "new voice," etc. Calliope, if the initial statement had been that New York wanted a new, peppy, lively, uninformed voice that wouldn't bother its readers with references that assume more than a 5th grade education, you're right. It wouldn't have been any of our business, and there wouldn't have been any public protest. That's not what happened here. They are cutting the dance reviews. Period. If they rethink this -- and we won't know until next year -- that's another issue to be dealt with then. LMCTech, the issue you raised was raised early on -- check up near the top of this thread. I don't know of many people who now believe that outside pressure from dance companies had anything to do with this decision and, in fact, people connected with the companies that, shall we say, did not always receive positive reviews in New York magazine were just as upset as those who enjoyed those less than favorable reviews. I also think that whatever a company, choreographer, artist, thinks privately about a particular critic, they don't want to lose coverage. They're grown ups.

Please do not become distracted by Miller's FIFTH version of her standard response, when it suddenly occurred to her that it sounded better to say she was replacing Tobias rather than cutting dance reviews. If that had been the intention, that would have been the initial statement. It was not. It took two weeks for the position to evolve to the "replace" "new voice," etc. Calliope, if the initial statement had been that New York wanted a new, peppy, lively, uninformed voice that wouldn't bother its readers with references that assume more than a 5th grade education, you're right. It wouldn't have been any of our business, and there wouldn't have been any public protest. That's not what happened here. They are cutting the dance reviews. Period. If they rethink this -- and we won't know until next year -- that's another issue to be dealt with then. LMCTech, the issue you raised was raised early on -- check up near the top of this thread. I don't know of many people who now believe that outside pressure from dance companies had anything to do with this decision and, in fact, people connected with the companies that, shall we say, did not always receive positive reviews in New York magazine were just as upset as those who enjoyed those less than favorable reviews. I also think that whatever a company, choreographer, artist, thinks privately about a particular critic, they don't want to lose coverage. They're grown ups.

Another email to NYMag, posted by permission of the writer: Dear Ms Miller: To be blunt: How can you possibly sack Tobi Tobias? She is a writer of uncomprimising integrity, acute judgement, wit, intelligence. Her all-too-infrequent columns have been my main reason for reading New York Magazine for years. She is a damn fine writer, a class act. For shame! And moreover, how can a magazine called "New York" possilbly consider having no in-house dance critic? This city is where modern dance was largely invented, and where it is continuously reinvented. This is the city that is home to ABT, and Balanchine. So what if times are bad? Dancing still matters, and writing about dancing matters as part of the civilized cultural discourse of this town. Tobi Tobias's dance writing in your magazine has been one of the most consistently provocative voices in that discourse. Tobi Tobias, with no place to write? This is impossible; this cannot be. I urge you to reconsider your decision. Something made wrong can still be made right. Christopher Caines Artistic Director Christopher Caines Dance Company

Another email to NYMag, posted by permission of the writer: Dear Ms Miller: To be blunt: How can you possibly sack Tobi Tobias? She is a writer of uncomprimising integrity, acute judgement, wit, intelligence. Her all-too-infrequent columns have been my main reason for reading New York Magazine for years. She is a damn fine writer, a class act. For shame! And moreover, how can a magazine called "New York" possilbly consider having no in-house dance critic? This city is where modern dance was largely invented, and where it is continuously reinvented. This is the city that is home to ABT, and Balanchine. So what if times are bad? Dancing still matters, and writing about dancing matters as part of the civilized cultural discourse of this town. Tobi Tobias's dance writing in your magazine has been one of the most consistently provocative voices in that discourse. Tobi Tobias, with no place to write? This is impossible; this cannot be. I urge you to reconsider your decision. Something made wrong can still be made right. Christopher Caines Artistic Director Christopher Caines Dance Company

Thanks for that -- I agree, it's very relevant. It is becoming the New Dark Ages, isn't it?

Thanks for this news, Jorgen. I hope you'll post a report!