Race, Culture and Ballet

[Hans]

No hard feelings I make my share of mistakes, too!

[bart]

{ ... ]the fact is that if one does wish to enter the debate than one has to take on face value the make up of ballet, both company and audience. It appears by its very state of existence to be racist, any organisation, not just ballet with such a huge predominantly white make up both historically and presently is.

I certainly understand the feelings that are behind these two huge and unsupported assumptions. But I also have to interject that neither statement adheres to any rule of logic that I am familiar with. (One of the definitions of circular reasoning is that one is expected to assume from the start the very conclusion that is being argued.)

It is important, I think, to honor differences in the way that people of good will and good intent approach these issues.

If we require everyone to accept such far-reaching assumptions as a precondition of being considered a person of good will, there is no longer any debate. Nor is there much of a chance to improve things, along the line that 2dds and others have constructively suggested.

One unanticipated outcome of this form of thinking and expression is a development that we are actually seeing in our society today. Vast numbers of frustrated people (of all colors) are simply dropping out of the debate, isolating themselves within their own "communities," and voluntarily withdrawing from dealing with or even talking about something that is actually desperately important.

[Herman Stevens]

Just a few things:

First, I never said anything about "people of color." In a thread such as this where we are treading on eggshells, it is important to read posts carefully, especially when quoting.

Sorry Hans,

It was Herman who wrote that, I apologise.

KL

Well I checked my contributions to this thread and unless I'm going blind you can apologize again* because I didn't either.

BTW I suspect for most non-US readers these intricacies of taboo terminology are rather bewildering.

*just kidding ya.

[Kate Lennard]

I have noted before that every top ballet company is totally eager to hire colored dancers of equal ability, for the simple reason that in many cases they wind up being tremendous audience favorites. I mentioned Carlos Acosta of the RB. In Amsterdam there are two dancers who stand out for their (relatively) darker skin and they are very popular.

Sorry to split hairs Herman,

But this is the line I was drawing attention to, I have absolutely no doubt that it was meant in no way to be a racist slur and that's not what I'm saying at all.

The unacceptability of the adjective colour has its roots in the US. But it is unacceptable and causes offence amongst the black community.

The occasional hiring of black dancers on ability alone is what it's all about, no one would argue, however how far those black dancers progress is the issue. And the ratio of black dancers to white is the issue. Also relatively darker is a somewhat of a cop out. The day that a corps is composed of an eclectic mix of ethnic backgrounds, and this must be based on dance ability and nothing else, is the day that allegations of racisim, founded, unfounded, unsubstantiated etc will be utterly specious.

Bart, it's not an unsubstantiated claim. All I am saying is, that any environment where there are no, or at best one or two black people the overriding impression one will come away with is not of inclusivity.

I am not saying that this is set in stone, or that it's the artisitc policy, ethos of the company BUT one is aware of the relevance of any art or subject to oneself, it's subjective. And a person notes this. When travelling around one's own city one is aware if one is in an area one is not used to. I recently went to a friend's birthday in Catford, a predominantly black area of London, and there I was aware in a way I rarely am of being white. It was an issue.

A ballet audience/performance is white. My husband was entirely conscious of this, as was Def Jef and regardless of whatever agenda we bring to this topic, history, cultural referencing employment policies the fundamental issue is that a black man/woman/child visiting the ballet for the first time will see little or nothing relevant to them in terms of their ethnicity.

Should they? No. Will this be an issue to them? It's of course up to the individual. Should this be an issue to us? Well, how many black people are currently following this topic? How many is it even of interest to?

No one is saying that ballet is consciously racist. That's not the topic. But, what is the topic is does this matter? Should it matter?

And Bart it's not a question of substantiation. It's a question of responding to the physical evidence and fact before one. A topic started by Def Jef on the basis of the empirical on his first viewing of ballet.

That's the issue this thread is really about. Or so I believe. And I feel it's a vitally important one as seeing ballet through my husband's eyes, I remember seeing it a new and a fresh for the first time and many of the questions I had to ask myself were troubling ones. Not easy ones.

[papeetepatrick]

I have noted before that every top ballet company is totally eager to hire colored dancers of equal ability, for the simple reason that in many cases they wind up being tremendous audience favorites.

'Colored dancers' is not far removed from 'colored people.' I don't find this offensive personally, and do agree, Herman, that non-U.S. people probably are bewildered by these distinctions. I think that 'colored people' is probably associated more with Deep South 'colored only' signs in the hard-segregation days, separate water fountains so marked, etc.

People from elsewhere may also not care for 'people of colour.' (I don't particularly). However, anytime you hear local programs on PBS, such as 'Black Journal' (I'm not sure that continues) or shows about the Dominican or Puerto Rican communities of a city, you will hear the black and/or Puerto Rican hosts and guests always use the term 'people of colour.' You should note this, Kate, because if is offensive in the U.K., it is nevertheless the term that black leaders use here. Hard leftists always use it, too, although I am not concerned with pleasing either the hard left or the hard right myself.

This is a minor point perhaps to some of us, but not to everyone.

On a different note. I was a student usher during the 1979 Met ballet season, and saw all but one or two at most of the performances of Alonso's Nacional Ballet de Cuba. We all loved this one virtuosic dancer named 'Carreno', but I cannot remember his first name. I thought he was astonishing and thought he would have been magnificent in any ballet company, and his looks were very pronounced African. I'd be interested to know if anyone knows if he continued in Cuba (probably) or went elsewhere or what.

[Kate Lennard]

I have noted before that every top ballet company is totally eager to hire colored dancers of equal ability, for the simple reason that in many cases they wind up being tremendous audience favorites.

'Colored dancers' is not far removed from 'colored people.' I don't find this offensive personally, and do agree, Herman, that non-U.S. people probably are bewildered by these distinctions. I think that 'colored people' is probably associated more with Deep South 'colored only' signs in the hard-segregation days, separate water fountains so marked, etc.

People from elsewhere may also not care for 'people of colour.' (I don't particularly). However, anytime you hear local programs on PBS, such as 'Black Journal' (I'm not sure that continues) or shows about the Dominican or Puerto Rican communities of a city, you will hear the black and/or Puerto Rican hosts and guests always use the term 'people of colour.' You should note this, Kate, because if is offensive in the U.K., it is nevertheless the term that black leaders use here. Hard leftists always use it, too, although I am not concerned with pleasing either the hard left or the hard right myself.

This is a minor point perhaps to some of us, but not to everyone.

Patrick

I've stated this on several occasions. There is a difference between the term "people of colour" and the term "coloured person" or any use of coloured as a descriptive adjective for a black man, woman or child. And here is another issue coloured is used predominantly to describe black skin. It's not merely in the US where it is offensive, it's offensive in English speaking nations. The response is always the same: "if a black man is "coloured" is a white man "colourless"?

I'm sorry if this seems splitting hairs, but it is an important semantic issue. One which one must be black to feel the true implication of in the life that is lived.

I am well aware the term "people of colour" is reclaimed through civil rights. And what is the issue here related to this topic, is the face of ballet to "people of colour". It's not a face they recognise.

I realise too this is an extremely sensitive topic, but I feel that to do it justice one must be sensitive to the semantic implications of discussing ethnicity in this forum and related to ballet.

KL

[papeetepatrick]

Kate--so what do you prefer then in order to be clear? Is it better to just say 'non-white,' 'black,' 'African-American' or 'Hispanic' and 'Asian'--because the division is clearly between white and non-white. You have to decide on terms to describe the different ethnicities that are then not offensive, because there would be no sense of racism at all if these differences were not perceived. It's possible this really is better, because 'coloured,' as you say, does suggest 'colourless' for whites, and then it would really get twisted if someone white said 'I'm too colorful to be considered colorless,' so best to stick with 'white,' 'non-white', 'black,' 'African-American.'

I never use the term 'people of colour' myself, and 'colored people' is from long times past. I say either African-American or black, and Hispanic (I knew one person who used to say 'brown people' for Hispanics, but I never heard it again) and Asian. I don't much care for 'European-American', but maybe it's useful.

[Mel Johnson]

I believe that "persons of color" is a direct translation of the Creole "gens de couleur" as commonly used among Francophone West Indians and those from New Orleans. It refers not only to those of African descent, but of American First Peoples (who mostly call themselves "Indians") and Asians. I don't believe, as such, that it requires any pardon in a pluralistic society. Or is Anglophonia the only acceptable discourse?

[kfw]

(Kate Lennard @ Jul 27 2006, 01:14 PM)

The unacceptability of the adjective colour has its roots in the US. But it is unacceptable and causes offence amongst the black community.

Except among the ones who use it.

The day that a corps is composed of an eclectic mix of ethnic backgrounds, and this must be based on dance ability and nothing else, is the day that allegations of racisim, founded, unfounded, unsubstantiated etc will be utterly specious.

All allegations are specious without evidence, and requests for evidence have produced one example from the 1950's.

the fundamental issue is that a black man/woman/child visiting the ballet for the first time will see little or nothing relevant to them in terms of their ethnicity.

Should they? No

In that case, there is no basis for the charge that ballet is, consciously or otherwise, racist. If we're talking about trying to reach out and introduce more people to this great art form, that's another subject.

[Helene]

I am well aware the term "people of colour" is reclaimed through civil rights. And what is the issue here related to this topic, is the face of ballet to "people of colour". It's not a face they recognise.

I have to go back to kfw's earlier question on several threads, which is whether ballet, or I would add, any classical art, should change to be recognizable. It is one thing to train and cast color-blind and to expand the acceptable body types across races, and which I've already seen among white dancers in a number of companies, which is why it seems a bit absurd to me to claim that the same body type in a dancer of another race is somehow unacceptable. It is quite another to change ballet and ballet training to be more culturally acceptable. I've never heard a demand that if a white person were to train to become a Kabuki performer, that the classical canon of Kabuki would be expected to be made more recognizable to white people, or that the strict, classical training be changed to accomodate anyone who wanted to express his or her own ethnicity or individuality during that training. Is there a demand that traditional African dance be made more recognizable to a white audience?

This is very different than training an audience to see art forms that can be intimidating and not immediately accessible, and in providing technology aids, like seat/supertitles or the simultaneous translation headphones that were available for Kabuki performances in NYC in the pre-titles era. It is different than the compact versions of the Peking Opera (as it was advertised in the late 70's and early 80's) works that the company brought in its first US tours, or than the hour-long versions of The Nutcracker that are appropriate for the attention spans of small children.

When Dance Theatre of Harlem presented it's Creole Giselle, the difference between the classicism in that production and ABT's was nil. That the venue could change from Germany to Louisiana without missing a beat showed the timelessness and universality of the story. The assumption was that the audience would accept classicism on its own terms, in a more immediate context.

At the pre-professional level, there is a very rigid code of behavior and dress. The teacher rules, with varying degrees of benevolence. Classes are quiet. The style is formal, pulled-up, and elegant. Hair is kept up and away from the face. Very simple clothing, with the entire class in the same colors, is required so that the line is not obscured. A reverence ends class. (I would have lasted about 15 minutes.)

Whether this is at all appealing to the kids who have to sacrifice for an art form that is alien to most people is questionable. But for those who are willing and have talent, I think it's critical that they are not blocked by notions of a racially homogeneous stage picture or the inability to cast based on ability in a role, because it is "unbelievable" that a non-white would be a romantic hero or heroine, which is even more absurd in the neo-classical/abstract works.

There are already huge concessions made by ballet companies to produce marginally classical works to be "relevant" and recognizable to its core audience. With the dumbing-down of the repetoire, I can see how it could be insulting that concessions are made to a primarily white audience that are not made to any other audience. I would rather see an audience educated than catered to. If the form of movement is irrelevant or uninteresting, then not everyone will like everything, but at least the choice is informed.

[kfw]

It is important, I think, to honor differences in the way that people of good will and good intent approach these issues.

And once one does, a lot of perceived racism disappears.

[Kate Lennard]

The day that a corps is composed of an eclectic mix of ethnic backgrounds, and this must be based on dance ability and nothing else, is the day that allegations of racisim, founded, unfounded, unsubstantiated etc will be utterly specious.

All allegations are specious without evidence, and requests for evidence have produced one example from the 1950's.

KFW

What exactly do you mean by this? There's a huge amount of evidence anecdotal and documented about the difficulites faced by black dancers within traditional ballet companies.

The KKK/Wilkinson story, offered up as an amusing tidbit is not amusing when you consider what could have happened. The Ballets Russes, perhaps inadvisidely took the gamble of trying to introduce Wilksinson to the deep South. What saved her was her relatively pale complexion rendered white by pancake make-up and white lights. They intended to drag her off the stage and...? God knows. And this marked the beginning of her end.

Andrea Long and Aesha Ash talk feelingly and with much pain of their struggle to achieve promotion with NYCB, Ash, most powerfully being told not to stick around if she wanted to make soloist, it wasn't going to happen.

Yes, the evidence is scant, because the number of black dancers who have risen to any kind of position of worth or note within a classical or neo classical ballet company can, as a previous poster so rightly said, be counted on two hands.

the fundamental issue is that a black man/woman/child visiting the ballet for the first time will see little or nothing relevant to them in terms of their ethnicity.

Should they? No

In that case, there is no basis for the charge that ballet is, consciously or otherwise, racist. If we're talking about trying to reach out and introduce more people to this great art form, that's another subject.

Here, you very much misread what I was trying to say. Does ballet have a duty to operate an equal opportunities policy extending to all aspects of the hiring of corps etc? Of course not. Does ballet have a multi cultural imperative of presentation or outreach? No.

Should it be forced into this? No, of course not.

However, when a criticism is raised against the ballet world or rather the established classical or neo classical tradition within Europe and the US, of racism based on the empirical (and let's remember this was the motivation for the whole topic) it can hardly defend itself with any integrity or rather with any answer that will be satisfying to the first time viewer or ballet novice.

[Helene]

Wilkinson never reached the status of principal, one which both she and most importantly her colleagues in the Ballets Russes felt should have been hers by right by dint of talent alone. Zide speaks feelingly and angrily even of this fact...

True Wilkinson did return to dance, in the more liberal Netherlands, where she rose to soloist and there it stopped. Those many happy years were not "happy" in the sense of a fair and just conclusion, they were contentment in the form of compromise.

What is the basis for assuming that in that company in the Netherlands in the standing repertoire, that Wilkinson should have been a Principal instead of a soloist? Was this widely noted among dance critics or historians? When early in her career Maria Calegari, after an early rise, was ignored by Balanchine, there were any number of her friends who told her that he was being unfair to her. (Luckily, as she described to the audience at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in the 80's, Joseph Duell told her that he was right.) Any number of posters here will explain exactly why Veronika Part should be a Principal Dancer at ABT and how Monique Meunier was dissed both at NYCB and ABT. There have been a number of soloists from Europe who joined NYCB and not only stayed in the soloist ranks, but were underutilized. Some of them matched the company style and fit into the repertoire, some of them didn't. ETA: I accidentally deleted this before posting: This is not to say that race was not the issue behind this decision, but that usually comes out years after the fact, when colleagues and critics come out and say that a given dancer or athlete or professional was so much better than his or her colleagues.

Andrea Long and Aesha Ash are very fine dancers. Are they finer than the women who were soloists at NYCB at the time? Were they better than the corps members who moved up to the front rows? For every dancer that accepts a long-term career in the corps, there are several who can tell you why someone had it out for them or didn't recognize their talent or why they're better than

. Ash is hardly the first dancer to be told, your career ends at this stage in this company. And she is hardly the first to find a great rep in another company, like Carla Korbes, who danced a dream season at PNB this year.

By sheer numbers, it is easier to become a player in the NBA than to become a Principal Dancer in the 5-10 companies that are considered the top US companies. It is easier to be a member of Manchester United than a Principal Dancer at the Royal Ballet, if for no other reason than greater turnover in the former.

If Ash and Long had the talent of Suzanne Farrell or Ashley Bouder, which they do not, in my opinion, would Peter Martins have continued to ignore them? I can't answer that, but if SAB had a number of black dancers in the school, odds are, I think there would be a greater distribution of black dancers in the ranks over time, and since SAB is a training ground for dancers from many other companies in the US, over more and more companies.

[kfw]

Kate Lennard @ Jul 27 2006, 04:14 AM)

There's a huge amount of evidence anecdotal and documented about the difficulites faced by black dancers within traditional ballet companies.

Kate, I keep asking what it is. The Wilkinson tragedy is ancient history in terms of race relations in America.

Andrea Long and Aesha Ash talk feelingly and with much pain of their struggle to achieve promotion with NYCB, Ash, most powerfully being told not to stick around if she wanted to make soloist, it wasn't going to happen.

Relatively few dancers are promoted even to soloist. What evidence did these give that race held them back?

Yes, the evidence is scant, because the number of black dancers who have risen to any kind of position of worth or note within a classical or neo classical ballet company can, as a previous poster so rightly said, be counted on two hands.

I'm afraid that's circular reasoning.

[carbro]

One of the more nebulous issues in this whole discussion is, is sheer ability the only determining factor in who gets hired/promoted? Not in ballet. Sometimes a company has two female places to fill, and four very promising lyrical dancers. But they sorely need soubrettes. So they hire the soubrette, who may not be as accomplished, even in her niche, as some of the lyrical dancers. Balance and variety are factors. And maybe an artistic director just finds a certain je ne sais quoi in some dancer that remains a mystery to the wider audience. That, too, has been known to happen.

I remember Judy Fugate, a dancer whom I greatly admire -- in an interview (Dance Magazine, if I recall correctly) saying that she was surprised to have been taken into NYCB, because she was not long of leg nor neck and not the best dancer (in her opinion ) in her class. As near as I remember, she said, "You never know why they take some people and not others."

[Mel Johnson]

I am getting a curious sense of Talleyrand here: "Surtout, pas de zèle!" (Above all, no zeal!) It often strikes me as odd that advocates for a cause rustle up an unholy hoo-raw about a subject where those who live in it daily are significantly quieter. W.S. Gilbert wrote a Bab Ballad about two barristers who were appointed as counsel to opposing sides in a probate case. Each prepared his case and his arguments, and took most vociferously his client's side, only to have it arrive in court and have the judge submit it to arbitration as a friendly suit. The rival lawyers, however, had become so enamored of their own opinions, that they form a lifelong blood feud. That appears to me to be what's happening with this discussion. When we go into conjectural history ("If they had caught her, what would they have done with her?"), it is the gossip of professional historians, speculating, most often when seriously in our cups, on what might have happened if what DID happen hadn't happened that way. But now, I find myself falling into the trap of petitio principii, of begging the question, of arguing about the argument. We should return to the matter under discussion with an intention of being part of its solution.

[Helene]

I remember Judy Fugate, a dancer whom I greatly admire -- in an interview (Dance Magazine, if I recall correctly) saying that she was surprised to have been taken into NYCB, because she was not long of leg nor neck and not the best dancer (in her opinion ) in her class. As near as I remember, she said, "You never know why they take some people and not others."

Fugate entered NYCB during a couple of years of bumper crops, with the long-legged, long-necked Nichols, Lopez, Calegari, Alexopolous among them. (Possibly Saland, too, but she was unusual for the company as well.)

There have been times of plenty when dancers who would have be snapped up a few years earlier or a few years later were passed over because of the depth of competition. There are long spans where half the Principal roster is likely to be filled for decades, and shorter ones where it seems every dancer will reach retirement age during that time, and there will be a shift. Any of the tens of top US Senior Ladies figure skaters who knew realistically that there were two places on the 2006 Olympic team, after Kwan and Cohen, can appreciate this very well.

[bart]

I agree with Helene and others that there are limits to how far an art -- classical ballet -- can change what it does before it ceases to be ballet. The analogy to Kabuki is excellent. We've also talked on previous threads about opera, where more or less traditional approaches continue and are not at all harmed by multi-racial casting. The Violetta may be African American, or the Semiramide may be Korean, but the opera is still recognizably what it has been in the past and was intended to be.

I also agree with those who maintain that there are many variables that explain why one dancer is promoted and another is not, or one dancer has doors opened to him/her while others finds them to be closed. Race (color) is one possible factor only. Given our history, however, it's a possisbility that has to be taken seriously.

It seems to me that in 2006 we no longer have a clear, agreed-upon idea of how important a factor race is as compared to all the other factors influencing our complex lives. We can conjecture. We can feel it. We can extrapolate from experiences of dancers decades in the past. We can appeal to the stories of certain individuals who have not flourished in the system. But in the absence of serious, systematic studies, we simply cannot say with confidence that we know what's going on as a whole, and in all situations. We know it's not what it was in 1940. Or 1960. But we don't have enough evidence to say there's an even playing field nowadays either.

So, where does that leave us? I do believe that we have to listen carefully and take seriously the way that people tell us about what is affecting them negatively in our society. If a significant proportion of (let's say) African Americans involved in ballet believe there is some kind of discrimination going on, this is a very important fact all on its own. Feelings may not "be" facts, but they often have the power of facts.

I believe that we must listen and respond to those statements, whatever our ethnicity. And that we need a constructive approach that increases opportunities in training, employment, etc. Those in positions of responsibilities in the ballet community -- and those who donate large sums to them -- should, as 2dds says, make this one of their priorities.

[Mel Johnson]

I remember Judy Fugate, a dancer whom I greatly admire -- in an interview (Dance Magazine, if I recall correctly) saying that she was surprised to have been taken into NYCB, because she was not long of leg nor neck and not the best dancer (in her opinion ) in her class. As near as I remember, she said, "You never know why they take some people and not others."

If Judy Fugate HADN'T been taken into NYCB, she would probably have been the only one not surprised. From about age 8 to about 13, she was the perennial Clara/Marie in the NYCB Nutz, and is responsible for several little girls being able to dance/act the part, because year after year, they kept making costumes in the next size larger as she grew!

[2dds]

I feel like this thread is one of the liveliest I've ever seen and so far with some detours one of the most civil on this topic. I also apologize for not weighing in sooner with responses and clarifications to points I personally raised, but a thread that generates over 100 posts (allowing for at least a few more today) between July 23 and July 28 is a bit daunting. Monitoring this is a fulltime job, literally.

I have tried to take the considerable time to review this thread and pull out a few themes, and with the encouragement of one of the moderators weigh in on a few issues. As I said previously, I am not a moderator, but I do have decades of personal thought and formal training on these diversity/identity matters that I would like to share. I offer this, not to step on anyone's toes, but respectfully as an effort to be part of the solution, not the problem, as we used to say in the 60s.

We must exercise great care in this discussion. As a veteran of many of these encounters over the years, I offered my three initial points of agreement in the first post. I am not requiring anyone to believe these, but would ask that anyone who seriously and constructively wants to address these issues IN THIS DISCUSSION, agree to these three. If anyone disagrees that's fine, but frankly, it needs to be handled outside this thread because it impedes discussion. This is not a judgment about anyone personally but if we cannot get this agreement, we can't move forward.

I am a relatively new member and can't seem to master the quote function so I have pasted in the section of my earliest post to which I refer:

I think a good starting point helps. Just as men are not ideally positioned to fully appreciate the ins and outs of gender discrimination, our lived experience definitively differs and determines our racially defined realities in this country--with our American history it cannot be otherwise. As mentioned in other posts, some have the priviledge (luxury?) of not having to think about race, while others must confront at least the possibility of it affecting their lives every day as soon as they leave their front door (maybe even before). Not only are these viewpoints radically different, they do not confer equal expertise in discussing this issue. We must first get past this to have a productive discussion. Then we have to move forward as people of goodwill to explore productive creative remedies to achieve a better climate specifically for ballet.

I think it would be good to first agree that we want ballet to be more inclusive, more representative, but I'm not sure everyone agrees this is desirable. I do think this needs to be an acknowledged desirable goal. Whether we think there is discrimination or not, can we agree there is underrepresentation? If we can make this a given, can we procede to identify greater diversity and inclusiveness as a valuable change we would like to see in ballet--be it audiences, administrators, performers, students, teachers, choreographers, critics, or patrons?

I think agreement on these points:

#1-the extreme subjectivity of our viewpoints and the lack of equivalence and level of expertise of these viewpoints

#2-the underrepresentation of people of of color--noticeably and demonstrably non-white--throughout all levels of the ballet scene

#3-the desirability of having ballet in the future thriving while evolving in a more inclusive and racially diverse world

would go far toward furthering discussion.

I said in my second post, later that same day, I felt the substance of my first July26 post had been somewhat ignored. Frankly, I still feel these points are worth repeating and I should say why.

Some have said explicitly or implied that inclusiveness is not a high priority for them in ballet. Issues of race and discrimination are not paramount in their daily lives, and the differences between terms like colored people, or people of color, don't really matter to them personally. Many have questioned whether there is anything actually going on in the ballet world that is really exclusionary. These represent personal points of view that I must respect as I must respect all persons. However, if we cannot agree that people of color are underrepresented and that is desirable to remedy this, such viewpoints will serve ONLY to derail any efforts to create solutions to this thorny problem.

I respectfully submit that those who do not believe there is a problem, or who do not believe this is a priority worth dedicating time and energy to can enter this discussion only to prevent change. I don't think that behavior is respectful, respectable, appropriate , or welcome. I would politely request that going forward, people who don't think there is a problem, refrain from offering suggestions and solutions (non-solutions) to other members who are sincerely trying to work toward remedies. Of course, it's fine to believe we are wasting our time on this thread, but if this is to become a problem solving exercise, try to refrain from shutting others down with the continual questioning of the reality with which we must deal. And I thank people in advance for at least taking seriously the points I have just made.

I think agreeing to my initial points #2 and #3 is crucial, but even more vital and more difficult is agreeing to point #1. We live different lives in this country based on our own visible racial and ethnic identities. Our experiences and opinions are distinct. Some cannot choose to ignore these issues. They do not have that luxury (rephrased from the earlier post of mine). Those who can choose whether or not to confront these issues must acknowledge that having a choice on this is already a form of priviledge.

We never like to admit to these kinds of difference in the US, but in this case, I believe it is less divisive to admit that the potential targets of discrimination are in a different position than everyone else. That is what I was suggesting with my gender example. Do men and women have equal expertise on what it is like to have a life circumscribed by gender discrimination? Absolutely not. Please note, here I said expertise. Men must defer to women on this issue; they--the women--must be acknowledged as the experts, the authorities. All opinions are not equally valid. The same is true here on issues of race and discrimination.

In our eagerness to reassure ourselves, we bring out examples of the rare exceptional cases of people who have managed to surmount barriers even as we ignore these folks' own descriptions of real injuries, pain and discrimination that they suffered. Is it any wonder that dancers of color are reluctant to attest to problems in their personal experience in such a climate? Given the daunting odds against anyone having a successful career in ballet, it becomes difficult, as several posters have pointed out, very difficult to sort out what factor race may play in hiring, firing, and promotions. Difficult, but not impossible, and here I would like to make a few more observations/suggestions.

We appear to be going round and round about racism, who is, who isn't, if ballet is or ballet isn't. These questions are unproductive if they are about subjective feelings whether it is guilt or outrage. The answers require too much soul searching, confession, and angst. Moreover, the answers are often colored by wishful thinking--not me, not here, not anymore, etc. Questions of intent and well meaning-ness are similarly fraught. This also gets back to questions of authority and our own subjective realities, but more about this later.

For the time being, and especially in the instance of accusing people or institutions of practicing racism, let's avoid feelings and stick with practices. As one poster (defjef, I think) defines racism it is based on institutionalized exclusionary practices--this is not about feelings. Also practices are things we can make a commitment to change, and our inner hearts and souls remain, rightfully our own private property.

I was careful to speak of underrepresentation without trying to discover intent. Here we get into the thorny territory of evidence. This thread begins with the simple observation, made by Defjef, that the ballet world lacks diversity. Carbro as a knowlegeable moderator lists a collection of related threads that are part of the history of this board.

Defjef introoduces the term racism, and Mel Johnson wearing two hats it seems, both a professional historian's hat and his official Ballet Talk status--introduces the counter term anti-racism and working toward solutions. Herman Stevens finds the whole topic "depressing" and feels black dancers are surely welcome everywhere. As an example he mentions the one would think predictably lily white Royal Ballet and its perennial favorite Carlos Acosta (identifiably of African descent). Mr Stevens points out black dancers are crowd pleasers, what company wouldn't want them!?!

Many posts early on in this thread also chastize Defjef for one thing or another (lucky he is self-described as thick skinned on this issue), and several moderators (Alexandra, Helene, Leigh W.) weigh in on proper conduct, proper subject matter, and gound rules to procede. There are also pointed recommendations from Major Mel and Bart to stay productive/constructive (see posts 18-31)

I'm glad this thread survived that difficult time, but I suggest, some of the problems that lead to that shakey point have not yet been addressed. I apologize in advance to Herman Stevens, but I am curious about why you weigh in on a topic that you seem to believe is not actually a problem? If you find it irrelevant that's okay, but once we have established underrepresentation and are trying to find the cause and the remedy, what does it serve to suggest everyone everywhere wants to hire crowd pleasing black dancers? I am not trying to point the finger, I am simply mystified by your intent. You are apparently similarly confused by my discourse and noted the following:

Herman Stevens is alarmed at and questions my definition of the term "we." I am defining it as it is explicitly laid out on this board--ballet lovers and supporters! Why does this stated definition of our community here on line get "scarey" and questionnable when we hit this particular discussion?

My euphemism of "purist" may have been the problem. I said we might lose a few "purists," and seemed not to care. I meant someone so committed to preserving the exclusionary practices incorporated in the history of ballet that this commitment would preclude participating in the reimagined future of ballet if ballet becomes more inclusive. I hope this is more clear. I did not want to be inflammatory and label anyone as racist or bigotted, but in this discussion , that might have been less confusing.

I hope we are more clear now about "we" here at Ballet Talk and can procede with more clarity.

As we seek creative ways to make ballet more inclusive, many have been concerned that this will lower the technical level of dance, dumb down the rep, or transform the art into something we can no longer recognize. Partly, I think this reflects how narrow the historical context of ballet has been and our inability to imagine ballet completely divorced from this very particular cultural and historical context. I hope it does not represent a sincere belief that including dancers who are not 'the usual suspects' a la Casablanca means the art form will necessarily be diminished if we include more diversity in the dancers. Let's explore this a bit.

Is this fear based on the worry that judgments will be made based on something other than excellence? If so, why don't we worry like this when discussing ways of including more male dancers even though we willingly admit they are rarer than female ballet dancers and that we need extra incentives along the way to ensure their presence? Why don't we worry in this FUNCTIONALLY equivalent situation? Why aren't people objecting to extra efforts (scholarships for example to males at every technical level)? Why, because we have decided that men are essential to ballet. We have to have partners, don't we? If we need to make extra efforts to bring this about, we bite the bullet and do so, because it is a desirable goal. Even as we speculate about why (is it the lack of males entering? is the studio climate making it difficult for males to remain in training? is it outside peer pressure?, etc.), we want the men here , so we go about doing whatever it takes to bring it about. Even before we have the answers to the why questions, we make efforts to find solutions, trusting that the proof is in the pudding. We do so tirelessly and consistently over time until we see results. We share strategies for attracting and retaining males, and we judge success on results.

I would suggest, if we decide we want to make ballet more inclusive, we have many practices already in place that could at least give hints as to how to make changes. We need be in no more fear that including many black, Asian and Pacific Islander, native American, or latin dancers is more likely to presage the death of ballet as we know it, than we fear similar efforts to recruit and RETAIN males. Technical excellence is--must be--a given. If we want to be inclusive and we do not still believe certain groups are genetically and biologically unsuited to dance ballet, we can use the example of including men with no worries about threats to the art form. Dancers can be equally valued without being identical, and we need to fearlessly do whatever possible to attract and welcome diversity throughout the ballet world.

Another example that occurred to me while reading this thread. Wouldn't it be interesting to see a contemporary story ballet crafted around MLKing's "Letters from a Birmingham Jail?" Imagine a corps of diverse dancers being hosed down by a police department of equally diverse dancers while the Rev. MLK crafts his responses. It could include variations enacting various sentiments expressed in the "Letters." How wonderful that could be if properly handled. Ballet technique is substantially the same in Paris, France and Paris, Texas, imagine harnessing that beauty to contemporary themes. (Before anyone jumps on me for keeping politics out of ballet, look back at the threads on ballet's history, think about the role of the military, nobility and court, their close relationship to ballet, and how politics created these venerable institutions...) Would this necessarily be a dumbed down rep? Would this fill seats like other story ballets?

If you prefer abstract ballet, think about a ballet devoted to the "jazz aesthetic" (much scholarship on a musical genre many musicologists have called 'American classical music'). This would address the stylistic innovations introduced in jazz with or without the necessity of an explicitly race based historical context. Scholars have looked at the similarities and contrasts among what have been described as two types of classical or symphonic music. These abstract artistic concepts could be embodied and explored through classical dance.

If we can find the will, we can find the imagination and ballet is already sublime--we have the tool.

This reply is already far too long. I have some more important points on:

terminology, listening respectfully to the assertions of authorities (the targets of discrimination) when they speak on underrepresentation and its causes, staying concrete--for ex why not follow up on the questions about Dance Theatre of Harlem by doing simple searches like where these dancers have landed and if they were hired at comparable levels, looking at how Raven Wilkinson's story has been a lightning rod for so many issues in this thread, empirical evidence, how neutral or standard is even a simple dress code if, for ex., hair doesn't form naturally into a smooth bun?, etc., creating a welcoming (this does NOT mean colorblind) climate that promotes equal access and inclusion, bart's request for more on meeting people on their own terms, the difficulty of ANYONE having a ballet career and how race could be teased out of what is already a long shot proposition.

but this is already too long (length, time to read, time to write).

I may not have internet access for a few days, so in my absence, I hope some things in this long post generate light more than heat and move us forward. Please understand if there are no responses from me for a bit. I promise to check back on or before August 1st.

Thanks so much to everyone who has taken the time and made effort to work through this difficult but vital subject

[papeetepatrick]

I think what Helene wrote is superb, and captures more than any single other post the way I feel about the issue. Also I think Carbro's post was especially illuminating here.

2dds--a moderator therefore gave you the special privilege of 'talking about each other' which the rest of us were warned against--else the thread would be closed (this warned first by Leigh and seconded quickly by Alexandra) You have therefore tried to take control of the whole discussion by determining that people should have to agree with your 3 principles if they are to talk about those. This causes people to turn a deaf ear and a blind eye to many, or even all of your best ideas. I personally am not interested in what you write because of the heavy and oppressive way in which you have lectured here. When you talk about the people at Ballet Talk, you are not finger-pointing apparently, but since everyone else is considered to be doing so if they do precisely the same thing, isn/t it really little wonder that some of us are going to then pay little attention to what you say--even if it happens to coincide with what we also think? In any case, Helene's post does cover what I think are the most important matters from a ballet-artistic point of view, not a professional diversity-training (usually used in corporate workshops in my experience) and social-worker's point of view:

I am well aware the term "people of colour" is reclaimed through civil rights. And what is the issue here related to this topic, is the face of ballet to "people of colour". It's not a face they recognise.

I have to go back to kfw's earlier question on several threads, which is whether ballet, or I would add, any classical art, should change to be recognizable. It is one thing to train and cast color-blind and to expand the acceptable body types across races, and which I've already seen among white dancers in a number of companies, which is why it seems a bit absurd to me to claim that the same body type in a dancer of another race is somehow unacceptable. It is quite another to change ballet and ballet training to be more culturally acceptable. I've never heard a demand that if a white person were to train to become a Kabuki performer, that the classical canon of Kabuki would be expected to be made more recognizable to white people, or that the strict, classical training be changed to accomodate anyone who wanted to express his or her own ethnicity or individuality during that training. Is there a demand that traditional African dance be made more recognizable to a white audience?

This is very different than training an audience to see art forms that can be intimidating and not immediately accessible, and in providing technology aids, like seat/supertitles or the simultaneous translation headphones that were available for Kabuki performances in NYC in the pre-titles era. It is different than the compact versions of the Peking Opera (as it was advertised in the late 70's and early 80's) works that the company brought in its first US tours, or than the hour-long versions of The Nutcracker that are appropriate for the attention spans of small children.

When Dance Theatre of Harlem presented it's Creole Giselle, the difference between the classicism in that production and ABT's was nil. That the venue could change from Germany to Louisiana without missing a beat showed the timelessness and universality of the story. The assumption was that the audience would accept classicism on its own terms, in a more immediate context.

At the pre-professional level, there is a very rigid code of behavior and dress. The teacher rules, with varying degrees of benevolence. Classes are quiet. The style is formal, pulled-up, and elegant. Hair is kept up and away from the face. Very simple clothing, with the entire class in the same colors, is required so that the line is not obscured. A reverence ends class. (I would have lasted about 15 minutes.)

Whether this is at all appealing to the kids who have to sacrifice for an art form that is alien to most people is questionable. But for those who are willing and have talent, I think it's critical that they are not blocked by notions of a racially homogeneous stage picture or the inability to cast based on ability in a role, because it is "unbelievable" that a non-white would be a romantic hero or heroine, which is even more absurd in the neo-classical/abstract works.

There are already huge concessions made by ballet companies to produce marginally classical works to be "relevant" and recognizable to its core audience. With the dumbing-down of the repetoire, I can see how it could be insulting that concessions are made to a primarily white audience that are not made to any other audience. I would rather see an audience educated than catered to. If the form of movement is irrelevant or uninteresting, then not everyone will like everything, but at least the choice is informed.

[fandeballet]

This might sound a bit simple . I am from a mixture of the HUMAN SPECTRUM!!!!

1) I really don't care about the color of skin. Technique and artistic depth are the most important things to me. This is dance, and an escape from the everyday doldrums of dance. I don't care how SHORT Herman Cornejo is, I want him to do more principle roles like Basilio and Ali!!!!!

2) My 1st ballet dancer I saw of note was Nureyev....a Tartar!!

Another dancer who is one of my all-time greats is Judith Jamison. a person of African roots. Just in my tiny sample, you could not get two people from such different backrounds. Or maybe their backrounds are not that different after all?!

I think that anytime a group(s) of people are excluded from and/or not exposed to something in school or with a parent, there will be underrepresentation from that group.

[papeetepatrick]

Another example that occurred to me while reading this thread. Wouldn't it be interesting to see a contemporary story ballet crafted around MLKing's "Letters from a Birmingham Jail?" Imagine a corps of diverse dancers being hosed down by a police department of equally diverse dancers while the Rev. MLK crafts his responses. It could include variations enacting various sentiments expressed in the "Letters." How wonderful that could be if properly handled.

That sounds more appropriate for modern dance, whether Bill T. Jones or Molissa Fenley or Pina Bausch or even Kylian, I guess. Maybe Anna Sokolow a few decades back. So you'd have pointe work in this? Or is that like severe hair--dispensible, and so just call it 'ballet'?

[Helene]

[ADMIN HARDHAT ON]

First, no one on the Moderating team has:

1. Annointed anyone as an expert

2. Given anyone dispensation to act as a Moderator, which includes determining what is appropriate for this thread.

It appears that I need to address some procedural issues:

Anything that addresses the original questions of the thread taking into consideration the courtesy and other Ballet Talk rules and policies is game for discussion, including logical extensions of those questions:

So what are the reasons there are proportionately so few non Caucasians on stage and in the audience? On a typical performance at the ABT, if there are 20 black faces in the audience it seems like a lot.

Could this also be attributed to the cost of a ballet education and years of training involved? How about the fact that the Dance Theatre of Harlem is filled with blacks and many of them talented dancers?

Would it be odd if more ballet dancers were black and Asian? Is ballet very much a Euro-centric art form that simply doesn't work with people of other ethnic groups? ... a black Juliette? Clearly blacks and Asians are very athletic and make some great dancers... and Michelle Kwan is a prime example of one.

The things that have been written on this thread that are inappropriate have been called out by several on the Moderating team:

1. General personal or political philosophy beyond the topic of racism or government funding and how it applies or doesn't to the question

2. Finger-pointing

3. Demands that specific posters respond to specific points

If, for example, there was a different thread called, "What can we do to make ballet more inclusive," then on-topic responses range from suggestions to the opinion that nothing can be done. However, that is not the specific topic of this thread.

[ADMIN HARDHAT OFF]

[2dds]

Luckily I found a moment to go online and try to undo some of the damage done with my last posts. First apologies all around for getting carried away. I was overexcited to think so many ballet lovers were interested in making concrete changes. I got completely carried away, and apparently permanently alienated many who might have taken me more seriously if I had not been so heavy handed. I'm very sorry to lose your support and attention. Please know that I was just in a headlong rush to get to some real ways to make ballet more inclusive, and tried to share some advice I had about how to advance the discussion.

I apologize for stepping on toes here, and I have absolutely not been annointed, but (as all can see in his posts) got some positive feedback from bart recognizing the time and care I tried to put in my posts. I felt encouraged and hopeful and apparently became overbearring in the process. I can see now that my comments to Mr. Stevens were especially out of place in this regard and apologize profusely in advance of him feeling free to properly call me to task on these violations.

Diversity training is very corporate, or can be, but can also be helpful I feel in any workplace --even an arts based one (it can also be a complete waste of time or worse). My orientation is actually not corporate, however, but academic thus the lecturing style--a bad but sometimes necessary habit in higher education. I was trying to avoid this undesirable result (wasting time, or worse just infuriating everyone) by assuming/forcing a consensus that doesn't exist; it really is an occupational hazard and not personal. It's what makes academics so insufferable--even to each other. Please forgive and forget.

I am properly reminded that this is not a thread about how to fix it, but rather exploring the issue, and I was out of line. I was not trying to oppress anyone, but must admit my priority is how to make a change, not exploring feelings for their own sake. I got impatient and apparently rude, and apologize all around for dictating, finger pointing and any other violations. I am not a special case. I was simply trying to move ahead with a project that was only in my own head and went in a wrong direction. It was not my intent to do anything personal toward anyone. My only concern was to further a constructive discussion oriented toward creating a friendlier place for a more diverse group--all still dedicated to ballet.

I would happily be banished to a "fix it" thread if a modertor could spin one off. I would love to work with like minded Ballet Talk people to figure out how to make ballet a more inclusive place for everyone. Again so, so sorry for the confusion and the hard feelings. I think I understand how sensitive and hard this can be. I will be big enough to forgive, too, and will try to take comments in the spirit in which they were intended, just as I have asked others to do for me.

Looking forward to a a thread more focused on how to get more inclusion. I would like to thank a moderator for spinning this off in your official capacity, since I can only start a fresh thread in my member (and a terribly new one at that) capacity. I would also continue to have limited and appropriate input on this original topic. Thanks everyone for your respect, patience, and honesty.

PS If soldiers and willis can be on pointe, I think protestors and law enforcement can be too

I also think for the historical classical ballets creative casting is all I would ask.