fondoffouettes

Ah, they were screenshots showing Hallberg and Abrera posing for photos as Romeo and Juliet. It should still be up on ABT's Instagram, if you click on their stories.

Why are we not seeing this pairing at the Met? ABT posted these photos as part of an Instagram story showing the promo photoshoot for its spring season. (Swoon is right!) If the ballet gods are listening --- please, please, please let Whiteside partner his fellow "Cindy" and reassign Hallberg to Stella! [Broken links removed]

I've been very impressed with the clips he has posted on Instagram. Definitely plenty of room for refinement, but the raw talent seems to be there. I'm generally more impressed by his upper body and port de bras than his lower body. There's sort of a heavy quality about his legs (I don't mean weight-wise), which I guess could just be a matter of line. It certainly would be nice if ABT could find a new prince. Whiteside and Stearns have been mostly disappointing from a dramatic standpoint, and Hammoudi seems to have become a lost cause, despite being cast quite a bit.

It’s true. She’s entitled to whatever response she likes. I think my frustration comes from the fact that she routinely makes oblique statements on Instagram, rather than just directly stating what she’s feeling/thinking. But that’s her prerogative. I admire LeCrone and Fairchild for speaking up in such a clear and eloquent manner.

A post from Robert Fairchild, which acknowledges both the good and the bad. The comments are definitely worth a read (he responds directly to many of them).

Good for her! I’m glad someone in the company isn’t simply mourning the loss of their boss and father figure. I’m sure it must be unsettling for the dancers, but just because a dancer doesn’t see abuse and has a good relationship with her boss doesn’t mean the abuse isn’t there or only occurred in the distant past. I’m glad NYCB is continuing their investigation. Maybe this is unfair, but I’m kind of annoyed by Mearns’ post. If she has something to say, she should just come out and say it. I’d reserve black for mourning a true loss of life (e.g., a life lost to drunk driving). I’ll just add my voice to the chorus: please no Millepied! I know Peck is the golden boy of the moment, but he’s so young. It would seem to be a real gamble to appoint someone with little or no managerial or fundraising experience. I wonder how long it will take the company to cycle out all the awful Martins choreography and those hideous full-lengths.

Haha -- yes! He was the most impressive male guest artist I've ever seen at ABT, but he made sure it was always Abrera's night. Just fantasizing here, but maybe they could reassign Whiteside to Murphy's Giselle and Romeo and Juliet, and bring in Shklyarov to partner Abrera in one (or both) of those ballets. (I think Whiteside has said in an interview that Murphy is his favorite partner, and they certainly have a good rapport, it seems.)

I believe Gomes’ assignments were one Giselle, two SLs, one R&J, Whipped Cream, and Firebird (can’t recall how many of those last two). If this were a few years ago, when Gomes had a huge workload, the situation would be more dire. I could imagine them maybe getting one guest star (for the Giselle?) and filling the rest with dancers in the company. While in general, I’m not crazy about guest stars dominating the schedule, which luckily they don’t any longer, I’d LOVE to see Shklyarov again. He seems to partner more petite dancers than Murphy and Teuscher, though. Maybe they can get Bolle to do more than his one scheduled performance. He partners many of the same women as Gomes and certainly has star appeal.

ABT engaged a law firm, which seems perfectly reasonable. They aren’t equipped to handle this on their own, and I can’t imagine this was part of some sort of vendetta against Gomes. He’s clearly loved by the company and I imagine they would have done anything possible to keep him. Why would they want to besmirch the reputation of an audience favorite? I don’t buy that “Gomes didn’t stand a chance.” He’s a grown man, well-connected, who has earned a principal’s salary for some years now and could have engaged a lawyer to fight this. He has pretty much the whole dance community ready to rally for him. But he resigned. Taking that into account, plus the implied gravity of the misconduct, as stated in the press release, I’m led to interpret Gomes’ actions as an admission of guilt. I can’t imagine a celebrated dancer sacrificing the last few years of his career because he was offended by management’s actions, but we are all just taking shots in the dark here. I agree with Classic Ballet that Gomes should get a lawyer, if he hasn’t already. If he hopes to move forward professionally, he’s going to need to come clean with whatever it is he did. But if whatever he did was illegal, then I’m guessing we may not hear anything for some time. I still think he has a better chance than almost any other accused figure of weathering this storm. There is a groundswell of support already, without even knowing the full details. I count myself among the fans eager to rally for him, pending more details.

I don't think it's reasonable to think ABT could issue a press release stating one of its star dancers has stepped down and give absolutely no explanation. Transparency with regard to sexual misconduct is crucial these days. We don't have enough information at this point to know whether this is political correctness or not. If Gomes did something egregious -- something that could pose a threat to ABT company members -- then ABT was smart to launch an investigation. I agree with what Kathleen O'Connell has written above on this matter. To put it in an entirely non-dance context -- would a school not fire a teacher if they learned he/she had slept with students at a previous place of employment? Just because Gomes' actions, whatever they were, didn't directly impact ABT staff, doesn't mean the company can just look the other way.

I feel the same way, canbelto. He’s been such a joy in my ballet-going life that it has been difficult to process all of this. Such a warm, giving, humble artist onstage. If it turns out that the alleged actions are not totally egregious, I hope he can move past this. Certainly there are few artists who could count on as much support from colleagues and fans as he. But until the story becomes clearer, there’s going to be a cloud hanging over him.

First response I’ve come across on social media, from Murphy.

Not much more in this Washington Post article, either, but it does include a statement from Julie Kent, who indicates she will go forward with presenting Gomes’ new work. http://wapo.st/2zctaRW?tid=ss_sms-amp

While that has been the trend over the past, say, 10 years, the company seems to finally be correcting this pattern. This year we have a corps member dancing Solor, and another one cast in the lead in Whipped Cream. In general, yes, they are still more conservative with casting than NYCB, but the company is finally giving meaty roles to some soloists and a few corps members.

I'd be in favor of Hoven being assigned one or two of his spots (it would certainly be bittersweet for Hoven, who seems to be very good friends with Gomes, based on their Instagram accounts). While I didn't catch his Sylvia or recent Nutcracker in Costa Mesa, his physique and technique have undergone a dramatic transformation in recent seasons. And he can partner tall women. But please, no more Hammoudi.

Yes, check out the Dancers forum for the thread on this.

If I hadn't heard from others here that she voluntarily gave up the role, I could have definitely read this as the role being taken away from her before she was ready to leave it, and that she has had to make peace with that. Also, it's true that she rarely says she dances a piece well, so that could make it appear that she's arguing she's still capable to dance Dewdrop. In any case, it's interesting to see a dancer publicly talk about retiring a role. Based on what others have said, it seems she just appears to be reminiscing.

What I took Helene's post to be saying is that sexual abuse can be physical, verbal or both. I think this is an important point to make -- verbal sexual harassment/abuse is unacceptable, just as physical sexual abuse is.

Yes, between the NYT and WaPo, it seems that neither paper has been able to identify concrete, specific examples of sexual abuse/harassment. The example you mention above seemed to really be reaching. Physical abuse is another matter, though.

As it should be. It's unfair to everyone in the company to have someone reporting to her spouse. It's filled with with potential conflicts of interest. But NYCB saw no need to establish this policy until after they had cut Kistler's last paycheck.

Since the #metoo movement, the only first-person account I've come across from someone currently working in the business is this one by mezzo-soprano Susanne Mentzer, though admittedly she's winding down her performance career and focusing more on teaching. (She doesn't name names either.) I've seen no other reports this fall from ballet dancers or opera singers currently working in the field. Making a living in either field is a daunting prospect, and I'm sure they feel they can't afford to burn bridges.

I'm not suggesting she should have left the company. It just seems reckless that they shouldn't have enacted a policy to protect other dancers/staff before Kistler retired. Certainly they could have added some clause about preexisting marriages or something like that.

I also just realized that the year NYCB's "reporting relationship" policy was instituted, 2010, coincides with Kistler's retirement. Of course they couldn't institute it earlier, unless they found someone else for Kistler to report to besides her husband. So were they waiting around for Kistler to retire before they bothered to protect other dancers?

Not that I expect any of the dancers to be saying much online, but it was been radio silence, at least on Instagram, where I follow many NYCB dancers. No posts about anything, Martins-related or otherwise.

This quote is very confusing, and I had to reread it several times before I understood what I think it is saying, which is this: The company forbids relationships between a supervisor and a subordinate when that subordinate reports to the supervisor (i.e., they have a "reporting relationship"). It then cites the case of the head of Lincoln Center, who was fired for having a relationship with a woman who reported directly to him. So, a relationship between someone who is say, head of development, and someone who is a manager in the PR department wouldn't necessarily be forbidden. The thing is, every dancer in the company reports to Martins, so any sexual/romantic activities between him and a dancer would violate the policy cited above.