NYC Ballet Cuts Corps as Deficit Widens

[abatt]

Isn't he pretty much doing what Balanchine did? One hears that Balanchine never fired anyone, just stopped casting them and eventually they would go away. However, Martins' saying Sophie could learn featured roles and then not following through strikes me as lying to her face.

Believe me, I'm no great defender of Peter Martins. However, we have to remember that we have never heard Martins' side of the story regarding what was purportedly "promised" to Ms. Flack, nor will we. As with the Aesha Ash story a few years ago, even if Kourlas contacted Martins for a response I have no doubt he would have no comment based on issues relating to privacy. What went down sounds like the classic "freeze out" used in businesses; instead of telling an employee directly that they are on the fast track to nowhere, the employer freezes the employee out of significant assignments, and intentionally either gives them absolutely no assignments, or really awful assignments. The hope is that the employee will get the hint and move on to another job. It happens all the time in the workplace. NYCB is no different.

Additionally, this may be off topic, but the interview mentions that the corps is "catty". I would imagine that NYCB cannot be a very friendly place right now for either Kathryn Morgan or Erica Perreira.

[Hans]

I understand that this sort of thing is common in other places and can be justified, but that doesn't make it right, especially given that ballet dancers have such short careers. Giving them the option of finding better roles and more fulfillment elsewhere instead of stringing them along for years seems as if it would be much more productive for both the company and the dancer.

[perky]

I just went back and re-read the article again. I wish Sophie had not said the phrase "a lot of people are frustrated". It makes you wonder if those dancers that were close to her and hung out with her are now paranoid that the boss is looking at them with a speculative gleam in his eye. I understand why she said it, "you see, it's not just me!" but I wish she hadn't.

I also wonder if she had ever asked Martins what she could work on in order to progress in his eyes. It might not have made a difference in the end and he might not have told her the truth but who knows. We like to think that promotion in ballet is based on talent and it is, but a lot of it is luck too. Being in the right place at the right time, having the right look, catching the right persons eye, these also matter.

I'm not disputing Han's statement that Balanchine reacted to dancers asking for more to do with the same "if I don't let them do anything new maybe they will just go away." He did indeed. But in his case I think that was his way of letting them down nicely. When pressed or backed into a corner he could be brutal enough to make you wish you hadn't asked. I'm thinking of some of the stories in the I Remember Balanchine book.

[SandyMcKean]

Corps member D = $68,220

I know next to nothing about dancers salaries, but I can't imagine that a CORPS member makes this kind of money anywhere in the world in one calendar year regardless of how long their season is.

P.S. If they do, I start ballet lessons tomorrow .

[abatt]

I also wonder if she had ever asked Martins what she could work on in order to progress in his eyes. It might not have made a difference in the end and he might not have told her the truth but who

I think she mentions in the article that she, and others who were let go, committed the infraction of not attending company class. For people in the know, what is the significance of this? Is failing to attend company class a big strike against you?

[ami1436]

Sandy, I'm with you. After seeing that number, but also even the amount that RB corps make annually... man... way more than those starting in my field make.

[Hans]

I'm not disputing Hans' statement that Balanchine reacted to dancers asking for more to do with the same "if I don't let them do anything new maybe they will just go away." He did indeed. But in his case I think that was his way of letting them down nicely. When pressed or backed into a corner he could be brutal enough to make you wish you hadn't asked. I'm thinking of some of the stories in the I Remember Balanchine book.

I understand, but that was another era, and even so, I still think it's unproductive. It makes more sense to me to say, "I wasn't really happy with how you were dancing this past season. You need to work on X, Y, and Z, and you have X amount of time to improve them or your contract will not be renewed/you won't be promoted/I won't recommend you for a raise/&c" (depending on how serious the issues are). There is no need to be brutal, just state the facts and be specific. That's how it has been in every day job I've had, and I was always under the impression that it would be illegal to fire me without a documented history of unsatisfactory performance and a chance to improve. I understand that in the ballet world one can be let go at any time, for any reason (unless one is a soloist or principal, apparently, which surprises me) but I still think it would help both dancer and AD to be clear about any problems and to give a reasonable amount of time to fix them. That way everyone knows what is going on. The dancer doesn't have to try to read the AD's mind to understand what s/he needs to work on, and the AD doesn't have to pray that the dancer just leaves before s/he has to fire him or her.

And yes, I realise that taking a reasonable approach is not something that is likely to occur to many people in the ballet world, but I can dream!

[FauxPas]

I think Sophie Flack needs to see this firing as a door opening rather than a career in dance ending. She may have only ever wanted to dance for NYCB but at 25, she still has a lot of dancing left in her. Why throw out the pancake and the sponge? Maybe work in a modern dance or contemporary ballet company where your breasts aren't too big and heavy stage makeup isn't used? Moving on could be a great thing for her. Also don't corps dancers generally retire at a younger age than principals or soloists? I think I read somewhere that corps dancers are usually pushed out around the age of 30 or thereabouts. So it is not a forever thing. She may have faced the same situation five or eight years from now at an older age with less options open to her.

I passed by the Majestic Theater - home to Phantom of the opera and took a look at the cast list up on the wall. There are some ballerina roles in the show that are often taken by former ABT and NYCB dancers - I noticed the name Amanda Edge up on the boards. It seems she has been doing Phantom for some years now both in Las Vegas and New York. There are lots of jobs for dancers with good training if you want to look beyond the two big companies in NYC.

Many, many talented dancers didn't go anywhere at NYCB in the last 25 years under Peter Martins - even dancers who made principal often have had a languishing on the vine experience for both themselves and their fans. Recently the company has had an influx of really talented young dancers - Pereira, Morgan, Scheller, Peck, Hyltin and Mearns who are all under 25. Clearing out dead wood happens in all companies. I am actually more against principals and soloists having a guaranteed sinecure with the company. What is Nilas Martins dancing these days? How much is he getting paid?

[Simon G]

I think she mentions in the article that she, and others who were let go, committed the infraction of not attending company class. For people in the know, what is the significance of this? Is failing to attend company class a big strike against you?

It's a bit like being a priest and never attending Mass.

[Simon G]

I think Sophie Flack needs to see this firing as a door opening rather than a career in dance ending. She may have only ever wanted to dance for NYCB but at 25, she still has a lot of dancing left in her. Why throw out the pancake and the sponge? Maybe work in a modern dance or contemporary ballet company where your breasts aren't too big and heavy stage makeup isn't used? Moving on could be a great thing for her. Also don't corps dancers generally retire at a younger age than principals or soloists? I think I read somewhere that corps dancers are usually pushed out around the age of 30 or thereabouts. So it is not a forever thing. She may have faced the same situation five or eight years from now at an older age with less options open to her.

I passed by the Majestic Theater - home to Phantom of the opera and took a look at the cast list up on the wall. There are some ballerina roles in the show that are often taken by former ABT and NYCB dancers - I noticed the name Amanda Edge up on the boards. It seems she has been doing Phantom for some years now both in Las Vegas and New York. There are lots of jobs for dancers with good training if you want to look beyond the two big companies in NYC.

Many, many talented dancers didn't go anywhere at NYCB in the last 25 years under Peter Martins - even dancers who made principal often have had a languishing on the vine experience for both themselves and their fans. Recently the company has had an influx of really talented young dancers - Pereira, Morgan, Scheller, Peck, Hyltin and Mearns who are all under 25. Clearing out dead wood happens in all companies. I am actually more against principals and soloists having a guaranteed sinecure with the company. What is Nilas Martins dancing these days? How much is he getting paid?

Faux Pas,

Maybe she wants to quit dancing. It's not true that dance is interlocking and connecting in terms of disciplines, for some when they danced in the company they wanted, in the style theyve wanted, the rep they wanted - that's it.

NYCB dancers have traditionally had a tough time transitioning to other companies - the NYCB style is so unique, so distinctive and technical demands so geared to one style of ballet - the transition is sometimes impossible. Ansanelli went from being a star at NYCB to having a pretty rough time at the RB, despite achieving principal status again. (Though I think a lot of the criticism levvied at her was deeply unfair - she was often the most exciting thing on stage.)

Modern and musical theatre have their own rigours and disciplines and if you hav no interest in them why do them? Modern pays abysmally and musical theatre is pretty superficial - this belief that you should keep on at all costs when you've had what you've wanted already is a specious one. The impression that I get from her interview is that to continue in this manner is like flogging a dead horse.

Sometimes when somethings dead and done, it really is.

[Hans]

Didn't she mention that her contract said attending company class was optional? In that case, as long as she kept up her technique, I don't see why that should be counted against her, unless it was known that would be a problem. I've had contracts with ballet companies that stated company class was mandatory, so I don't think it's that difficult to stipulate if an AD wants the dancers to attend.

[Beatrice]

I'm kind of torn on how I feel about the article. On one hand, I give her credit for speaking her mind. But on another hand, I sort of feel like she is throwing a temper tantrum. She doesn't really appear to be looking realistically at the impact that the recession is having on the arts (or the NYC job market in general). She didn't appear to be coming across as particularly professional. She didn't seem to take into account the impact that this article would have on her future. And the story seemed extremely one-sided. I think that what struck the biggest chords with me were that she seemed genuinely unaware that attending "optional" classes is expected (and a better way to move up than simply asking for better roles) and that she wanted to use the Dancers' Choice program as a chance to protest. Those two things really screamed out entitlement to me.

I do feel for her. It must be terribly bitter to be in her position - almost better to have never gotten there than to have it ripped away at 25. But she's still young enough to redirect her life. Most people are just starting in the world at about 25, anyway. I hate to see jobs lost, but I agree with those that say that the company can't risk losing out on fresh talent in order to hold on to individuals who probably won't advance.

[SingerWhoMoves]

I don't think that Sophie cares if she came across as Professional. She admits she is very angry. I don't think she sees herself continuting to dance, and I think that's ok. She discusses her lack of modern training and says she doesn't feel comfortable pursuing that at this time.

As for the dancers in Phantom of the Opera- I know many- it's a way to keep performing for a living ,but there is barely any dancing at all, so I don't think it can be equated with dancing with a company- even a small one. Also, you kind of have to want to sing a little- which I am not sure everyone does.

:-)

[Simon G]

I'm kind of torn on how I feel about the article. On one hand, I give her credit for speaking her mind. But on another hand, I sort of feel like she is throwing a temper tantrum. She doesn't really appear to be looking realistically at the impact that the recession is having on the arts (or the NYC job market in general). She didn't appear to be coming across as particularly professional. She didn't seem to take into account the impact that this article would have on her future. And the story seemed extremely one-sided.

Beatrice,

This is kind of naive. When your whole world has been destroyed and everything you've ever worked for taken away - you don't care about the bigger picture, about the economy or anything except that white hot core of pain.

Of course it was one sided, it's her story. And she felt, quite rightly that this kind of behaviour is never spoken about, corps members, dancers disappear as she said just removed from a roster and that's it. She didn't want to just disappear without giving her side.

company class is a strange thing, YES it's good to be seen but if the ballet master or mistress doesn't teach in a way that gives you what you need you are better off finding a teacher that can.

This article isn't about professional. She's been a professional from childhood - and where has it gotten her? It's the fact that an ex professional is talking about the ugly side of a business that makes it so much more truthful than those awful anodyne press releases that claim everything is hunky dory and people are just "going their seperate ways."

[Beatrice]

This is kind of naive. When your whole world has been destroyed and everything you've ever worked for taken away - you don't care about the bigger picture, about the economy or anything except that white hot core of pain.

Of course it was one sided, it's her story. And she felt, quite rightly that this kind of behaviour is never spoken about, corps members, dancers disappear as she said just removed from a roster and that's it. She didn't want to just disappear without giving her side.

company class is a strange thing, YES it's good to be seen but if the ballet master or mistress doesn't teach in a way that gives you what you need you are better off finding a teacher that can.

This article isn't about professional. She's been a professional from childhood - and where has it gotten her? It's the fact that an ex professional is talking about the ugly side of a business that makes it so much more truthful than those awful anodyne press releases that claim everything is hunky dory and people are just "going their seperate ways."

Well, in my opinion it "got her" the chance to perform with one of the most prestigious ballet companies in the world. For whatever reason - and we will never know the entire story - that chance did not develop exactly as she would have liked. I hate the fact that she is in pain, however, things that she expressed in this article gave me a glimpse into the possibility that she was not the most professional or most hard-working dancer on the roster. Of course, I don't know the specifics and I am only going on things she said. But reading between the lines, I questioned her professionalism.

Of course she needs to grieve and she's entitled to her pain. I'm not even saying that she needs to look at the economy or the bigger picture at the moment. I'm just saying that there IS a bigger picture. And included in that picture is the fact that the arts community in NYC is very small. Once you get a reputation of being difficult to work with or entitled, it's hard to get a job. I don't think it's naive to say that she probably didn't do herself any favors in the long run with that interview.

[miliosr]

No wonder Miss Flack is confused about why she was dismissed -- we can't even agree amongst ourselves as to why the February Massacre occurred. Was it purely an economic decision brought on by terrible financial circumstances? Was it because the affected dancers stagnated artistically and technically (and the fiscal conditions gave the administration cover to carry out the firings??) Was it because the affected dancers ran afoul of management for things like not realizing an "optional" company class was really mandatory???

I go back to the New York Times story in February. The firings were presented entirely in financial terms -- the picture being so bleak that management had to axe 11 dancers. But then, quietly, we hear about the hiring of apprentices. (The first I heard about it was at the end of a Times review!) This tells me that management saw the economic problems all along as an opportunity to terminate certain employees and do it in a way that wouldn't create a firestorm (until it was too late.) They got what they wanted but they made themselves look shady in the process and I have to believe that the surviving corps members will look at the way City Ballet management handled things vs. the way ABT management handled things and say, "Wow, there is zero loyalty at this company."

I am actually more against principals and soloists having a guaranteed sinecure with the company. What is Nilas Martins dancing these days? How much is he getting paid?

Preach it Faux! Perversely, some of this pressure the company is experiencing as a result of the logjam at the top should lessen in a few years as some of the principals retire. Just looking at the guys -- Askegaard, Evans, Neal and Martins are all hovering around 40. There should be plenty of room for people like Angle (the younger), Danchig-Waring and Fairchild to advance before too long; thereby opening more soloist spots for corps members. But for now . . .

As for the corps member D vs. apprentice A comparison, keep in mind that the comparison was just hypothetical to demonstrate the potential differential between the two. It was about as far away from scientific rigor as you can possibly get.

[DeborahB]

Attending company class is not mandatory per se, however it is a smart thing to do (and is encouraged) -- especially for corps members.

[Helene]

I'm glad she said what she did. I don't have to agree with it all or analyze it like a doctoral thesis for consistency, but there's a lot of ugly behind this beautiful art form we love so much, and I don't think it's asking too much for us to recognize this.

[tutu]

There's something that's troubling about the assumption that the corps members are "dead wood" who are holding back the growth of the company. Though I don't know the inner workings of NYCB, I would imagine that there is a role for reliable senior corps members--that is, the corps de ballet is not simply a place for the next round of soloists, fresh out of SAB, to cool their heels. If these senior dancers are consistently cast in corps roles (and NYCB's corps is quite large) and consistently do their job (show up for rehearsals, arrive at the theatre at their designated call times, and dance the roles with a high level of technique) who's to say that they're a liability to the company? While it's fun to look for the hot new face from Workshop in the corps, that doesn't necessarily mean that the new girl is dancing the same ballet at a higher level than the existing members. As an audience member (and this is embarrassing to admit) I often fail to pick out specific corps members as looking especially beautiful unless they have recently performed a soloist role (including at Workshop) or unless they have an extraordinary facility (i.e. Kaitlyn Gilliland). If the level of the company has advanced enough that a senior corps member has fallen behind, that's one thing. No one wants to see a dancer stick out "for a bad reason." However, there are a limited number of people who can catch the director's eye, and soloist roles, or rather, lack thereof, don't necessarily mean that a dancer's bringing down the corps.

Some have referred to the idea of "artistic and technical stagnation," I'd like to raise the point that it's possible that a director may lose interest in dancers even as they are still growing. Look at, for example, Callie Bachman, who two years ago received an extraordinary amount of publicity. Has she been given soloist roles? Is that a reflection on a loss of potential? While it's likely that it took her some time to recover from her injuries, it's doubtful that she suddenly lost whatever qualities drew Martins's interest in the first place. Cruel as it sounds, it's more likely that, when she was not in front of those who decide casting, she was, to be frank, simply not there--almost forgotten. I don't mean to fault Martins. It would be an extremely tall order, essentially impossible, for Martins, or any other AD, to be expected to constantly be paying full attention to every dancer in a company of NYCB's size. ADs are human, after all. What I do mean to say is this: if a director's eye is caught elsewhere, it doesn't mean the dancer in front of him has lost ability or has failed to grow.

On a separate note, even if it's optional, I would imagine that not attending company class makes it much harder for a dancer to advance. Company class is likely one of the few places that a dancer really has the chance to show himself or herself off if he or she has not been given soloist roles, as a corps dancer doing their job shouldn't look especially different than their colleagues. (In class, it's probably more acceptable to throw in those 4 pirouettes.)

[vipa]

Attending company class is not mandatory per se, however it is a smart thing to do (and is encouraged) -- especially for corps members.

Interestingly when Mr. B taught company class attendance could be sparse. Some dancers were regulars and others rarely attended. I don't know how that affected individuals. Eddy Villella didn't attend but Mr. B used him. Meryl Ashley attended and (in my opinion) benefited because she came to know what he wanted and gave it to him in class. Remember Ashley was a dancer who took a while to be promoted to principal. In other words I think it is hard to say how attending co class impacts any individual, but it offers opportunity to be seen outside of rehearsals, and to know what the AD is looking for.

For me it was a little odd that Flack missed the end of one teacher's class to catch the end of another teacher's class. For me that is not the best way to study.

The other perspective interesting to me is age. Flack must have been 16 (maybe 17) when she got into NYCB. She must have thought wow this is it, I've made it. She had injuries and had set backs, and came to know real life. Look back to when you were 16 or if you have kids, their perspective at 16. I can't imagine my kids (21 & 24) having the responsibility and maturity of being an "artist" in NYCB as teenagers.

I do think Martins should have been honest at their meeting and said that he didn't really see her in any of those roles. He could have advised her to attend rehearsals if she wanted to show him.

It is offensive that principal dancer money is being spend in Nilas Martins.

Sorry for the rambling - just some thoughts

[Helene]

There's something that's troubling about the assumption that the corps members are "dead wood" who are holding back the growth of the company. Though I don't know the inner workings of NYCB, I would imagine that there is a role for reliable senior corps members--that is, the corps de ballet is not simply a place for the next round of soloists, fresh out of SAB, to cool their heels. If these senior dancers are consistently cast in corps roles (and NYCB's corps is quite large) and consistently do their job (show up for rehearsals, arrive at the theatre at their designated call times, and dance the roles with a high level of technique) who's to say that they're a liability to the company?

I agree. Without senior corps members to anchor the corps and set the standards, the corps becomes just a set of soloists and potential soloists waiting to be cast in something else. The last time I looked, NYCB still had a core rep to which a real corps was critical.

[SandyMcKean]

And then there are dancers such as Jordan Pacitti at PNB (IMHO) who is a corps dancer and has been for some 10 years. I don't pretend to understand the reasons why he hasn't made soloist (if he even wants to), but this company would be very much the poorer without him. He played what I expect is the finest "Siegfried's Tutor" I will ever see in last season's Swan Lake by Kent Stowell. It is not a big part, not really a soloist part, but done right, it is a superb part. Jordan was a brilliant combination of grace and humor as he applied his remarkable acting and character skills to this part -- all the while bringing high caliber dance in unexpected ways.

Frankly, I don't even want to imagine a company without a few "senior" corps members like Jordan Pacitti who can raise the level of an entire performance by virtute of the fact that every part in a ballet is danced at the highest possible level. That's not to say that some corps members ought not to move on and make way, but in the final analysis, it is the artistic contribution each dancer makes to the company, and to the ballets themselves, that counts......regardless of postion in the hierarchy.

[Marga]

For me it was a little odd that Flack missed the end of one teacher's class to catch the end of another teacher's class. For me that is not the best way to study.

Wilhelm Burmann and Nancy Bielski teach at Steps, and I assume that that's where Ms. Flack took class with them. The classes at Steps have overlapping start times and several ballet classes are going at the same time, so in order to participate in both Willy Burmann's and Nancy Bielski's advanced classes, one has little choice but to take barre in one and center next door in the other. I think that's what was being referred to. She does mention that she also took private lessons with them.

The current schedule shows that you could take all of Burmann's class, then join Bielski's after barre.

edited to remove link to Steps schedule, since it is presented by a different company that doesn't allow you to use your back button to leave the site. I hate that!

[tutu]

Of course, gaining soloist roles is, in a way, very different at a company like PNB, where senior soloists are all but required to do soloist or demi roles simply because of the size of the company. There are, according to PNB's "Company Overview," 51 dancers at PNB. At City Ballet, there are over 51 dancers in the corps alone.

[tutu]

I wasn't going to be the one to bring this up, but I'm too snarky to control myself:

Do you know what happens when an AD decides that a soloist or principal has come to the end of the road and wants to terminate a contract in US companies? Can they actually do that?

An AD can't do that (at least at NYCB, and, from what I know, ABT too).

It has to be some major breach: being arrested for a major crime etc.

Like, say, being arrested for felony cocaine possession?

Edited by Admin: There is no known real life example of a conviction that has been made public by the company, the court system (where almost all are documented in the public record), or by law enforcement.