Helene

Another way to look at it is that he would have decided that now she is ready both for the role and the promotion. He cast her in the Guggenheim excerpt, which he didn't have to. Why take the opportunity for the free publicity and goodwill by announcing a promotion onstage, making the performance even more of an "I was there when..." special moment?

According to BalletMet's 2015-16 season announcement, Mark David Bloodgood, who is listed as a PNBS student, is joining BalletMet 2, along with PD student Daena Bortnick. I don't see him listed in the School Performance program. http://www.balletmet.org/201516-dancer-announcement/

BalletMet has announced its 2015-16 roster/roster changes: http://www.balletmet.org/201516-dancer-announcement/ Retired: Carrie West Jimmy Orrante Jackson Prescott Sarver Courtney Muscroft Christopher Ellis Joining: Kohhei Kuwana of Oregon Ballet Alexander Hyman of the Pennsylvania Ballet Candice Adea of Hong Kong Ballet Grace-Anne Powers of Ballet San Jose Josh Seibel of Ballet San Jose Miguel Anaya, Sarah Reimold, Ao Wang and Carly Wheaton from Washington Ballet, its studio company and school Promoted from BalletMet 2 to BalletMet: Arielle FriedmanJoining BalletMet 2: California natives Margot Aknin and Darian Kane Daena Bortnick and Mark David Bloodgood from the Pacific Northwest Ballet School Austin Moholt-Siebert from Ballet San Jose School Peter Kurta from Tulsa Ballet 2

NYC Dance Project: An interview and portraits of Carla Korbes, including one with Peter Boal: http://nycdanceproject.com/carla-korbes/

NYC Dance Project photo of Julie Kent: https://www.facebook.com/nycdanceproject/photos/a.1422994497937208.1073741828.1422904581279533/1641394559430533/?type=1&theater

(Patrick Fraser is Carla Korbes' husband.)

Here s thelinkto the press release: http://national.ballet.ca/Media-Room/News/New-Principal-Dancer-Jurgita-Dronina

Green won the Met Council Auditions a few years ago and has received most of the prestigious American grants, and he's already on his way. I love Amartuvshin Enkhbat. I would go out of my way to hear him and Park.

Julie Kent and Alessandra Ferri joined ABT just a few years before Twyla Tharp merged her company into ABT. While there were plenty of classics, there was also a robust neoclassical rep with new works, either world or company premieres. Tharp, Tippett, and Kudelka were choreographing in the '80's and 90's, the Macmillan "Manon" and "Romeo and Juliet" were added to the rep, and Tudor was not an afterthought. There was room for ballerinas who bypassed the tutu classics and a full rep and career path to Principal status for them. That's no longer the case, even for dancers who don't dream of dancing Odette/Odile or Aurora.

That's actually how I feel about Macmillan's "Romeo and Juliet." The only way I would see it again is if I was going with someone who really wanted to see it, or if there was a dancer I really wanted to see, and that's the only thing she was dancing. (In the first case, they'd have to buy me dinner, and in the second, I might need lots of wine. Except for Obraztsova.) I really don't like it, but I'm in the minority. I'm also a prime example of Newton's First Law of Motion: If I got to the theater to see a specific dancer, I'd probably go in even with the announced change, and I would only leave only under dire circumstances. If I wasn't there yet and going alone, I likely would eat the ticket, because I wouldn't propel myself into motion to get there.

Recitals are one of the few art forms in which refunds are granted if the specific artist or group does not show up. If your favorite concert pianist does not show up for a recital, if it's rescheduled, you're most likely offered a ticket to the new date or a refund. Otherwise, you'd get a refund. If your favorite concert pianist is scheduled to perform with the XYZ Orchestra and is replaced, you likely won't get any compensation. That pianist is likely on the first half of the program, though, so that you can leave after the first half, like the people who are only there to see the soloist and leave before the big symphonic piece. That is because the orchestra is marketing a performer, but selling you a ticket (contractually) to a performance on a specific date and time in a specific venue. I don't know how practical Anchorage is, but touring/more performances are the best way to give the dancers experience before they appear in NYC and face evisceration. Opera companies, like ballet companies, are also selling performances. I'm trying to remember if I've known an opera company to change which opera is performed at the last minute -- I know that an opera can be marketed as part of a subscription, but be replaced -- but ballet companies do change the ballets on occasion, and I've never been offered a refund when this happens. I suspect that most people who bought tickets to an ABT mixed bill for a night in July 1974 who got Baryshnikov's (American) debut in "Giselle" weren't unhappy. The issue of entitlement is an interesting one: we all know that contractually -- it's on the ticket and in the ads and brochures -- the company can do what it wants in terms of content and casting, and we can play or not. I'm sure someone with a ticket in July 1974 saw the schedule and thought, "Ugh, not another 'Giselle.' I may have paid [today's equivalent of $125], but I'm not paying the babysitter, gas, and parking and spending the time to see that again. I really wanted to see [ABT legacy work] on that mixed bill. Maybe I'll just stay home and watch the Mets." If NYCB had changed the matinee program the day Balanchine died, which they considered, I'm sure there were parents who might have left, since they were bringing their children to see "Mother Goose" and, if I recall correctly, "The Four Seasons." The issue becomes the trust relationship with the company and performers. For those interested in specific performers, or in "Anyone-but-[dancer(s)]," if the company has a track record of what can be interpreted as bait-and-switch, then people will do the cost-benefit calculation and decide whether or how to do business with them. You can hate on company policy, whether it be casting, dancer development, marketing, and/or exchange and pricing policies. The Metropolitan Opera made subscribers very angry when they liberalized ticket exchange policies when attendance was low, but then went back to a rigid policy for the couple of years that houses were getting fuller again. Many subscribers felt used, instead of being considered loyal during the hard times. Even with a liberal policy, if the last week is all "Merry Widows" with a singer that you cannot bear, there may not be anything for which to exchange your ticket when Jonas Kaufmann canceled. When NYCB's Fourth Ring Society was discontinued, many people were very, very unhappy. If the performer is unreliable or injury-prone -- or even has the reputation of being unreliable or injury-prone -- people can put it on the company for hiring that performer, or they can decide when and whether to risk the money to see that performer. There's nothing a company can do when a dancer has a last-minute injury or illness, except the best they think they can, but if people's nerves are frayed because of the frequency of disappointments, they have the right to their feelings. What they don't have is the legal right to get a refund or have any control about whether that dancer should be forced to perform. This is what happens when people discuss each other: there's nothing in rkoretzky's post that says anything about disrespecting the art by leaving. Questioning behavior, especially group behavior, is not off-limits -- we have this all the time in all of the performance behavior threads -- ad hominem attacks are. There are people here who think anyone who leaves as soon as the curtain hits the ground and doesn't stay to applaud the performers are disrespecting the performers. Similarly, there are people who think that leaving the theater during an intermission is disrespectful to the performers that follow. (Others have expressed feeling sorry for the performers that follow, which is not necessarily the same thing.) If I disagree, and someone thinks I'm disrespecting the performers and this impacts their enjoyment in any way, that's their issue. A person can have lots of money and decide not to use a ticket, or a person can have scraped every last quarter out of the couch cushions to buy one ticket a year and still walk away from it. Why does it matter what someone else thinks of our choices? This is a discussion board. There's a lot of disagreement here about everything.

The Song Final is accessible on the BBC Player for 30 days after the original broadcast; currently it's available for 29 days. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0607fdx

I disagree: there are dancers who would be demoralized, and there would be dancers who would want to be ready for their Lou Gehrig moment. Peter Boal brought in three apprentices to learn roles in PNB's all-Forsythe program this past March when only one had any reasonable chance of performing (and did) for the opportunity to be in the studio with Forsythe and his stagers, and he does this regularly. He also brings in talented dancers on the rise whom he thinks might be ready for revivals a few years down the road. For younger or less-experienced dancers at ABT, it could work the same way, philosophically. For experienced dancers, learning a new role opens more opportunities for guesting and to be ready to step in at ABT. There are resource and logistical issues for training dancers to be ready. They don't seem to be able to coach their performing dancers all that well. In fact, along with having contract flexibility, not having to pay benefits, and their box office appeal, an advantage to guest artists is that they come pre-coached and with experience in the roles, if not the production, a turn-key solution and the reason why many businesses rely on contractors. "Sleeping Beauty" got excellent coaching and direction because Ratmansky and his wife are hands-on with their productions and give very detailed corrections, and he knows what he wants. The rest of the rep: generally not so much.

Without knowing Hee Seo, I wouldn't presume to call her abused. She might consider it a challenge and be energized by it, and she may be gaining strength, rather than becoming overwhelmed or fatigued. It's a lot of work over a relatively short period, but it is the first time for lead roles that she's been called upon to dance so much. Her situation is not like Gomes', where he has had a very tough schedule for at least several years in a row,. He has more leverage and choices for his career, yet he keeps signing those contracts.

This is a tough decision, because on the one hand, you have in Abrera a lovely ABT dancer for whom this is a relatively rare opportunity and who is suited for the style, but in Nunez a dancer who doesn't appear that much in NYC. If this were even twenty or thirty years ago, I would say take the Royal Ballet dancer, but schooling in Ashton style has not been robust for a while.

Eh, "Guardian" with the blame-the-Americans: it was British-New Zealand baritone-accountant Teddy Tahu Rhodes who was first famous for performing shirtless and displaying a fine set of abs, something he began to lament, since he was expected to be time-consumingly buff: http://barihunks.blogspot.ca/2008/01/shirtless-teddy-tahu-rhodes-doing-push.html Ah, Barihunks. Jongmin Park of South Korea has won the song prize: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/whats-on/arts-culture-news/bbc-cardiff-singer-world-jongmin-9494055

A precious minute-and-a-half of Carla Korbes and Karel Cruz in the "Diamonds" Pas de Deux: https://www.facebook.com/PNBallet/videos/vb.21358443951/10153098827513952/

Thank you so much, Ilya, for the translation From the last paragraph, it sounds like Korovyakov agrees with Wendy Perron. Non-tragedies get no respect, like many dismiss Bournonville's work.

Maybe, but maybe not. For the majority of companies in North America, while there is overlap in rehearsal and coaching sessions -- and overlap in performance for two programs at SFB -- this creates a more controllable situation than for ABT and NYCB, which have longs blocks of performances in a row, and the impact of injury snowballs. (This can happen with the more common schedule, too, especially during "Nutcracker" season or when the company is using all of its resources, including students, for major productions.) A big issue is that it's harder to predict who will become ill or injured over the duration of the schedule, including by having extra performances, last-minute rehearsals, new partners, fatigue, etc. When they have five or six Juliets that need to be coached and rehearsed for their single, or if lucky, two performance(s), the number of dancers in whom they can invest to prepare as back-ups is limited. It's yet another catch-22 for the up-and-coming dancers: they are eager, but they don't get the resources. Fans of specific dancers and critics of the guest system at ABT might argue with the lack of opportunities, but if Osipova, Semionova, and Vishneva had danced their performances as scheduled, there would be plenty of oohs and ahs and happy customers. The AD and/or the stage has to decide who is dancing what, and then his or her scheduling guru(s) has to allocate finite coaching, rehearsal space, and rehearsal time, within the constraints of the contracts across whatever is needed. These are not trivial constraints. There is a tricky balance to give the most people the fewest amount of resources they need to be successful. Bringing in a dancer who has done a role in prior years is not necessarily an option, whether they had a day or a week's notice, when all of the moving parts are considered. That isn't to say that AD's don't make major mistakes along the way. I'm just not sure this is specifically one of them, given the overall artistic plan. Unless either Bolle's or Vishneva's contract is public knowledge, you don't know what their compensation is or how it is calculated; not all Principal contracts are the same. According to the 990's from 2009-2013 available from charitynavigator, neither was among the top earners at ABT whose compensation had to be reported individually. (The ABT website has the 2012 form only.) I remember the line in "The Turning Point," where Anne Bancroft's character says that when she learns that her and Freddie's performances would be cut, she feels bad for him, because they were being paid by performance.

We received a note to "Contact Us" will the following message: This is the message from the Joffrey Facebook page, which includes a wonderful photo: https://www.facebook.com/thejoffreyballet/photos/a.83267746934.85805.21202486934/10152929452901935/?type=1&theater Rest in peace, Mr. Magnus.

It ultimately doesn't matter whether they knew earlier or thought there was a chance that the dancer(s) would be ready, either based on the dancer's or doctor's evaluation. I've never read a Principal contract or guest contract and don't know if there are terms where a guest artist reserves the right to not cancel before a given date. What does matter is the perception that ABT withheld the information about casting changes to sell more tickets based on the original casts. The extent to which this matters is unclear. I'm not sure how wide this perception is: at Ballet Alert! we're a limited audience base who are self-selected to make our opinions known. Whether they are shared by many of the audience is unknown. (The truism in customer service for years has been that for every person who complains, that person represents a multiplier of people who agree, but I'm not sure when this was last tested or adjusted.) Some people who are upset by this will not buy tickets next year. Some people will skip the ballet; others will go see New York City Ballet. Others will buy tickets, regardless of how upsetting this is, because the trade-off of not seeing the work isn't worth it. Others have been converted to dancers they never expected to like. Some are just as interested in seeing dancers develop as they are in seeing a finished performance like the one Obraztsova was described as giving. Tourists who buy tickets because they've got a free night on Monday likely won't care, unless they are told to care.

If she's sick, she could risk injury by performing. She also risks the health of her partner, if she tries to dance in a weakened state, and Gomes already has had a hard season.

I respect dancers who are explicit about their terms, where their terms are accepted by the companies. If she hadn't earned the right to do so, there wouldn't be takers. Especially as dancers reach their late 30's, they should be able to care for themselves and not risk the rest of their careers.

We are getting very close, within a few hundred dollars of reaching our goal to keep us and BT4D up for another year. If you've been thinking about donating, we would very much appreciate it if you would do so now, so that we can close it for this year. Again, we appreciate all of the purchases made through the amazon box at the bottom of each page (if your ad-blocker doesn't suppress it) on which we receive a commission. They are the reason the fundraiser doesn't last three months each year.

That's not specific to Hee Seo. While individuals might not complain about substitutions if Murphy, for example, had been cast instead of her, to many others, whoever danced would have been "Not Osipova," "Not Semionova," or "Not Vishneva." The perfect storm of injury and illness to guests and the carousel of casting may impact future box office receipts, but from even before 2015 Spring casting was announced there were dire predictions about who was likely to cancel here, and they were intensified after the casting was announced. There were a number of members who said they wouldn't buy in advance or would buy fewer tickets in advance, and how close to the performance in question was "safe" -- obviously, not until curtain time -- was raised as an issue. Advance ticket sales have already suffered a blow based on what happened last year and the season before. On the other hand, there may be people who came in skeptical, but are now sold on Hee Seo. And/or Abrera. And/or Lane. And they won't shy away from buying tickets for these dancers in the future, and even if they are disappointed when it's not Osipova, not Vishneva, or not Semionova, they may be satisfied by the performances by in-house ballerinas.