kfw

That obituary is here.

Well, you're probably right, that was too cynical a way of putting it on my part. In any case, her wording was much more polite.

Wow, a dancer that young with that much knowledge and interest already - that's exciting to read!

I disagree, Helene. Balanchine and his school distilled and refined ballet technique for his own purposes, and although NYCB may not be the best exponent of the Balanchine style (which changed over the years, yes), SAB, with the possible exception of Farrell's classes, has always been recognized as the best place to learn what he wanted taught. I don’t presume to have any idea who they can use and who they can’t, and and if I’m not mistaken they do expose their students to outside influences. But one could hardly blame them if when considering new hires, they look for SAB training. Maybe Jimenez, with her own SAB experience, could still teach there. But if she has any real interest in that, ‘hire me or else you’re a phony’ hasn’t helped her chances. Anybody knows that. Of the two of them, who’s “playing” who? It's not like I can't understand a certain degree of cynicism, but she was offered an opportunity to help remedy a bad situation, and she turned it down.

I'm aware that many if not most SAB and NYCB teachers and ballet masters didn't dance or train under Balanchine himself. If those DTH teachers are willing to teach at SAB, great. But all the people on that list for whom there are bios posted have either years of SAB training or direct involvement with Balanchine.

If committees can do good, then theoretically Jimenez could have done some good on the committee, maybe even gotten herself or another person of color hired. She could always have resigned later if she found the committee was indeed just an excuse for non-action. But instead of extending good faith and finding out, she publicly rebuked the man and the institution that had reached out to her. Maybe "I am great" is considered healthy self-assertion nowadays, but it still turns off many of the rest of us. Also, if there are so few dancers of color, where did all those other Balanchine-trained teachers of color come from?

Yes, they have, but she was addressing me so I made my position clear.

I don't dismiss what you say here, but it's all too vague to be convincing yet either. People who worked with Balanchine directly should be considered authorities on his work, obviously - where exactly do you charge that they have used that authority to work against the training and hiring of black woman dancers? Here we have Peter Martins indicating he wants to encourage and develop black dancers, and a black dancer says, in effect, "Hire me or I don't believe you"? Martins, and anyone else, should get the benefit of the doubt unless they demonstrate they don't deserve it. I've never accused Copeland of trying to "steal" roles.

Thanks for the link. There are photos there I've never seen. Balanchine's jealousy is a sad thing to reckon with, although in this case, about the critics, he had a point.

It's possible to give individuals the benefit of the doubt in lieu of evidence to the contrary. What evidence is there that Martins is using the panel as an excuse and isn't serious?

I haven't read Parish's statement, but what strike's me about Jimenez's is its cynicism about Martins, and it's rudeness or righteous boldness, depending on your perspective, in airing that cynicism publicly.

I'm reminded of Susan Pilarre, I think it was, in the recent PBS broadcast of the 2014 SAB workshop, saying "I'd love to mother them," but that they had to find their own way.

A good thing, yes. I remember an Esquire cover - I thought late 1970's, but I find one from 1980 on ebay - with a muscular woman, and I think there were more such photos inside. At the time, it was certainly provocative. ETA: I don't mean sexually provocative, of course. I mean that it proposed a new form of female beauty.

Thanks for reviving the thread, kaskait. Rereading d'Amboise, he seems to think Balanchine sabotaged Firebird (what an utter tragedy) in part because he didn't want it to make Kirkland a star in her own right. Talk about cutting off one's nose to spite one's face!

Six years? She may have been talking about this for that long, but her book just came out a year ago. The big push began a year ago. But you're right of course, the now expected promotion has been awhile in coming. If indeed she experienced racism in the company, no. I don't doubt that all African-Americans experience racism. Whether Copeland did at ABT, or whether what she did experience was not outweighed by positive attention to and interest in her because of her race, is another question.

I have no opinion as to whether Copeland’s race helped her get promoted. I’ve never thought about it. I assumed she fully earned it through her dancing. My only point is that race is unlikely to have held her back, that having proved herself worthy of promotion, her race would likely then (and only then) have been considered another good reason (not one sufficient in itself) to promote her (having been a good reason all along to cultivate her talent). I take your point about the leverage campaign. If ABT was as media-savvy, instead of media-incompetent, as a lot of other companies are, they could have made something of her story, but they aren’t, and so maybe race wasn’t considered at all. But the fact that they didn’t promote her story doesn’t of course show that race held her back either. I disagree. Charges of racism might not have worked for DTH dancers, but when was the last time they actually backfired in the mainstream press? They presume – most of us presume – such charges are correct. And as you said, rags-to-riches tales are compelling. Copeland’s story was a pretty sure-fire success – certainly it had little chance of hurting her. But we’ve talked about this before. What is ABT going to do, come out with a we’re-not-racist statement? Give the racism narrative more plausibility by denying her opportunities she was on track for? ETA: Plisskin wrote: If you meant to include me among some people, I’ve been clear that I haven’t seen Copeland dance, at least in a featured role, which is why I take no position on whether she deserves promotion. But while video doesn’t adequately represent dancing, it adequately represents body type. I have also seen Copeland in person at the Kennedy Center. Nice body? That’s an understatement. Ideal ballet body? That’s another matter. But like I said, she may change perceptions of the ideal. Boylston and Seo get lots of criticism, from what I read. If they're not criticized as often, perhaps it's because they're talked not about as often.

Natalia wrote: But she did. It's interesting that you think she has a great shape for ballet. I wonder if she'll succeed in changing a lot of people's perceptions - whether she'll broaden or offer an alternative to the ballet ideal.

I've never heard of ABT sidelining its own dancers for foreign stars in soloist roles, so it would still need to cultivate soloists, and also they'd have to be really dumb not to see the value of promoting a black dancer. In any case, I've never heard anyone say Copeland's dancing is near the level of Hallberg's, so while Copeland couldn't have a better supporter, I think you're mixing apples and oranges. Hallberg rose to the top of his profession, and took advantage of what attention came his way (but hasn't even bothered to write a book so far). Copeland decided she deserved attention, and sought it.

Except maybe if the AD is woman-crazy Balanchine, and they're maybe even wearing what he bought them . Helene, when I say "deserves attention" from the wider public, I mean for the quality of their dancing. As one of the great male dancers of his generation, Hallberg was and remains, everyone who's seen them both seems to think, on a whole 'nother level than Copeland.

Copeland the principal dancer would have attracted lots of attention, very deservedly so, and very much to the good. Copeland the soloist deserves attention too, sure. But Copeland the soloist minus a triumph-over-victimization book would probably still be a relative unknown. Can you remember more of what that executive said?

Hallberg's dancing garnered him media opportunities, and all the dancing opportunities he could probably handle. Copeland's didn't, and that's the difference.

Wow, thanks Jack. It's wonderful to picture Magnicaballi in La Sonnambula and SVC.

"Moral judgment" is a black and white term, no pun intended, which suggests looking down on someone. Copeland is influenced by her times, as we all are. So you agree that Copeland was trying to work ABT? A value judgment on those who believe in Copeland's cause? I don't know what you mean there.

Well I know I only pay to see one of the two. Anyhow, if your analogy is correct, then Copeland was indeed working McKenzie for a promotion. Your comparison not mine, but one thing being on another's level doesn't make it moral, and "moral" is in any case too high falutin' in my opinion. If it was some sort of a crime to praise oneself in public, it would be a crime against oneself.

Drew wrote: I’m not sure there would be much debate if she’d done that. True of course, and I've said as much. Some people who’ve seen her dance think she deserves promotion. There would probably be little or no doubt at all about McKenzie’s reasons if she’d come out with the book after she’d achieved her goal. canbelto wrote: Well I reject the imagery, first off. Criticism isn’t “beating up” – that’s a loaded phrase. Secondly, comparing Copeland to a politician might not exactly make your case. Third, I’m trying to think of unflattering autobiographies and all that comes to mind at the moment is the mea culpa memoir by LBJ’s Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara, but in any case, I think whether or not they’re common is beside the point. No one made Copeland write the book and praise herself. Here I assume you’re talking about other people here, because I have no knowledge or opinions there. I asked Tapfan how black people supposedly have to behave to be allowed participate in ballet by its white “gatekeepers.” Who has been held back by A or B? C doesn’t make any sense as far as I can see – ADs won’t promote dancers who take opportunities ADs offer them? Likewise, I can't make much sense of D. Plisskin, you don’t need proof, which is probably pretty impossible to come by even when racism does exist, but you do need some evidence – not just, it’s-happened-to-other-people. But I'm not saying Copeland doesn't see it the way she wrote it. I assume she does.