SanderO

They could sell a painting or two and keep their staff employed. That's what they SHOULD do, because the art is not going anywhere, by 357 people without an income means a lot of pain NOW.

Considering that there is only WBAI and WQXR for "arts" programming and NYC has a huge arts community where would they turn? WBAI has the best arts programming on radio such as: Through the Opera Glass Lenny Lopate ( a great interviwer, but his food focus is way too bourgeois) from WNYC came from WBAI as do many of their staff. DO NOT GIVE FINANCIAL SUPPORT to WNYC, but rather to WBAI which is truly a listen sponsored non commercial station. WNYC is to radio as the NYT is to journalism - both are targeted to yuppies who weekend in the Hamptons, and have a corporate agenda... something their listeners and readership are very comfortable with. Corporations are ruining the world and will succeed in time with your help.

Laura Walker pays herself more than $500,000 a year. Let her well heeled rich friends buy up all the culture of NYC because that's what it's come to. here it is: But if that’s the WNYC board’s position, it misses the point. At an annual salary of $500,000, Walker is paid $200,000 more than her next highest-paid employee and more than the CEO of the far larger National Public Radio, which makes her salary excessive by her own industry’s standards.

This is indeed the problem: Everything in NYC is bloated rents, meals, salaries. Mr Maartins is not worth more than the Governor of NYS or the president of the United States. In my opinion he should be a lot less. Thanks for the info. I will never pay for a ticket to the NYCB again. Moreover, while the roughly 700K that Martins is making is certainly a commanding salary and arguably could have been cut more to sustain other jobs, it is not particularly exobitant for someone in his position in this city. Additionally, it's important to remember that part of his salary is coming from royalties.

Why does WNYC ask listeners for money to operate its station and then go out and buy one for presumable 10s of millions of dollars? Is it going to also be listener sponsored? More begging interrupted by Chopin?

I received this from a friend along with a PDF of an article in the local paper: "It looks like one of my least favorite outside lawyers may be sharing a cell with Bernie Madoff at some point for allegedly stealing union dues paid by American Ballet Theater's artists and stagehands in order to pay his kids' tuitions. I thought all his kids were grown. Did he have another crop with a second wife? According to the article, the alleged skimming from the union funds began roughly l5 years ago." Lovely

Occasionally an image will give the feeling of movement, not a movement frozen... or a frozen movement will capture the perfection and line of a step, a jump in a manner that you can't savor because it happens so quickly. Dancers doing jumps often seem more dramatic captured in mid air for example. These images can capture the exhilaration so effectively. Then there are images if ballet with the corps creating one huge "flower" or form, like calligraphy or classical architectural elements frozen as a form not part of a movement. Goethe called architecture frozen music. I'd call ballet liquid architecture.

How can his be called phenomenal music? Please explain because it doesn't impress me as such. And exactly how much of his music was he responsible for? Did he orchestrate or score his music? What instrument(s) did he play? I don't know much about this so perhaps Sandil or someone who knows might shed some light on this.

It's probably hard to have one same specific reason for seeing a performance. When a new production is staged the motivation may not be the casting as much. While casting may be the overarching motivation when seeing performance of stagings one has already seen. And of course you need to factor in the over all experience of the ballet goer. In the beginning of the journey you are probably just soaking up as many different ballets as you can and not quite into the casting nuance which comes after you developed some level of experience with various dancers. The casting as driving force seems to be at play for experienced ballet goers in general with a new staging as a strong motivator. Whatever the reason, the more you go, the more you see in each performance.

Not that it matters, but I agree with Miami.

Wasn't this production pretty much panned all around? If so, what is the thought behind pushing something which has not received critical acclaim? Why not drop it or improve it, but the same weird looking staging? And broadcast on TV? Is there some sort of death wish there or serious denial?

Jeez Louise - kissing is an expression of admiration and we certainly can admire people of the same or opposite sex. Whatever Mr Gomez does off stage, he is convincing in the parts he dances on stage and that's what we're there for - his performances. Who wouldn't want to kiss ms Part? hahahha

Just curious... what "class" of ballet lovers actually wait at the stage door to meet or speak with a dancer? It would seem that his would be the "fan", but I am not certain that some serious ballet lovers might want to speak directly with or to an artist or see them up close and personal and not on stage. While interaction outside the theatre seems perilously close to "fanatic", there is lots to learn about ballet from off stage interaction with the players. What say you?

I am wondering if the distinction that Leonid makes leaves out the "serious" ballet lover who is neither obsessed fan, nor at the level of a balletomane, perhaps an aspiring balletomane but held back because of any number of reasons - lack of money, access, time, other pressing commitments, yet not the "obsessed" fawning fan?

Everything is defined by its opposite.

This topic may seem odd for a site whose participants can't get enough ballet, but I would lile to discuss the experience of a lapse of attending performances for any reason and then the experience upon return. First have any simply decided to take a break for the reason to get some perspective, or to try to return with a different or fresh view? Is this a completely nonsensical idea? How about those whose circumstances changed and they no longer had access to regular performances as they once had, what was the desert like and what was the experience of return to regular ballet like? Did you see anything new and differently? Being away what exactly was the most difficult part of the lapse? Did you try to read about ballet in mags, online books or resort to videos? Once addicted to ballet, can a lapse be tolerable or is there always a constant longing to attend?

A standing ovation is an enthusiastic means to show how much you appreciate a performance. Go for it. If someone behind feels they must see the curtain calls, which they have a right to, let them rise to their feet as well. Which they will anyway in a few minutes when they leave. It is way more offensive to make noise, eat, whisper to friends, play with your cell phone while others are trying to concentrate on a performance. YIKES it's not a baseball game, it's a sacred (if you will) work of art.

I think most of the participants on BT are very keen on ballet and quite knowledgeable and would be balletomanes in my opinion. Having the moniker is something I aspire to. A guy can dream can't he?

I wasn't sure of the precise definition of the word so I surfed around and found this: "A balletomane is someone who has a deep appreciation and enthusiasm for ballet. One of the most noted balletomanes in history was Edward Gorey, who attended every single performance of the New York City Ballet for several years in the 1950s. Gorey was so dedicated to ballet that he refused to leave New York City during the ballet season for a number of years specifically because he did not want to miss any ballet performances, an attitude which many balletomanes would sympathize with. This term is derived from the French word “ballet” and the Greek manes, which means “ardent admirer.” It was coined in the 19th century to describe ardent fans of the Russian ballet. At first, the term was meant to imply a certain amount of mania, with balletomanes supporting specific artists with an almost alarming level of fervor, sometimes coming to blows over performances. Bitter debates between balletomanes seemed comical to outsiders, who simply couldn't comprehend the level of devotion involved. In the 20th century, “balletomane” began to acquire less extreme connotations, and it came to be used more generally to describe someone who really enjoys ballet. In addition to seeing a number of ballet performances each year, a balletomane is also typically very well informed about the art of ballet, and he or she keeps up with major artists in the field. Many follow specific ballet companies, sometimes traveling to see them on tour, and balletomanes can often rattle off statistics about the roster of dancers in a particular company. A balletomane may also appreciate other forms of dance, but usually ballet is the first love. Many are enthusiastic about the history of ballet and the development of the art, and those with money often donate generously to ballet companies and programs to spread ballet. Season tickets to a local ballet company are a must for a balletomane, and balletomanes can often be seen clustered in the lobby during intermissions to discuss the performance. In addition to being knowledgeable about dancers, and sometimes directly acquainted with them, balletomanes also enjoy the music, costumes, sets, and lighting associated with ballet. Some may collect visual materials related to famous ballet companies, such as coffeetable books which feature stunning ballet sets, or recordings of notable orchestras performing music composed for the ballet. Balletomanes are also eager to share their collection and love for ballet with others, in most cases." Based of the above, as much as I admire and love ballet, I can't say I have devoted the required time and energy to this wonderful art. It's hard to imagine when someone has such a powerful attraction to the art that they don't actually get INTO it as more than an observer. I don't think I qualify. I'll have cast a reluctant vote of - No.

I finally when to an HD in theatre presentation of the MetOpera this Spring. The performance was Lucia with Netrebko. It was interesting, the right price, close to home, but nothing to compare with the real deal. But I wonder if ballet would work in this format? I'd like to see one done that way, perhaps the ABT at the Met. I don't like watching ballet on a small screen but perhaps in the theater in HD it might be passable. What say you?

A role that requires a tattoo does not preclude any dancer from that role. They can apply a tatt as make up, which is what a tatt is, a kind of permanent make up. With ballet being so much about perfection in form and movement of the human body, it's hard to understand how many tatts could be considered as part of that goal. I see them as "fashion", despite them being rather permanent, and ballet as being more timeless and classic. I suppose some with tattoos see them as just part of their skin while others see them as something rather different. I find them a distraction and more so in ballet and so I would hope that they dancer and the AD would have the good sense to cover them. Otherwise it's a king of improvisation which appears to step over the line and disrespect the established traditions.

Would it be out of bounds to simply call ABT and ask what's up?

I know Gene Schiavone has done many male dancers and his photos are quite good and very painterly! But there are many others.

That is an impressive show. I'd love to see it, but will have to read about it here.

Essentially the scourge of private donation to the arts is hardly different from what we see in politics and government where "money is free speech" and you can buy yourself some "politics". We all live with the consequences of that system. Likewise the arts have decided to lay down with dogs and so they get up with a case of fleas. I don't know that all the arts institutions in the USA for example every get together and have a little chat about their funding, sources and the strings attached, but if they (and their egotistical directors) could speak with one ethical voice and stop this, we might get a better and cleaner funding model. The "People" in the USA have granted tax incentives for "charitable" donations. THAT SHOULD BE MORE THAN ADEQUATE OR INCENTIVE FOR SUPPORT OF THE ARTS. All the other stings, demands, naming rights and so forth a obscene exercises in egotism. The arts are created by brilliant individuals and preserved in what SHOULD BE public institutions. Sadly artists have historically been the chattel of the wealthy and their work was exclusively for the wealthy. I sense that too many artists are politically naive and those who rise to the top of these organizations know how to play the game and support and become part of the same ethically bankrupt system of exploitation. By the way all the museums in Washington DC are free as all musems should be. And something similar needs to be done for the performing arts. I doubt we'll see that because of egos and exploitation. Someone(s) have to take a stand, and it is not going to work if it is not someone who has the ear of the public and the powers that be. As long as people such as Mr. Martins raises toasts to the despicable Koch family little can change and he becomes a persona non grata to anyone who has a clue. His calculus to save his company, to give us lovers of ballet performances is nothing short of collaboration as the French did in WWII. Everything is political.