its the mom Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 "But I think that the hardest part about ABT for me is not the time situation but the fact that we only work thirty-six weeks per year. I get outside work but we’re not always available when other people want us to come. College is expensive. That’s still difficult, after all these years. I’m still collecting unemployment when I’m off." This is not unusual for dancers and staff around the country. ABT may have less weeks of work than some companies, but they have more than others. That is why dancers try to obtain other dancing gigs or teaching jobs during the summer. Link to comment
abatt Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 Paul Taylor dancers also collect unemployment during their off season. Not unusual at all. Link to comment
ABT Fan Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 3 hours ago, its the mom said: To sit on the Board, one must donate is my understanding. So, whether the money goes toward "sponsoring a dancer" or to buying new costumes for a certain ballet, etc., I don't understand what the difference is. To me, sponsoring a dancer implies a direct relationship of some sort (with a lot of sticky implications) whereas giving money to costumes or any other broader fund does not. It's perception. And, for a board member I think that's important. However, in this link that was posted above earlier, then Executive Director Rachel Moore said this regarding sponsorship donations: ''The money doesn't go to pay that dancer's salary...''That's not what this is about. It's about supporting the company.'' http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/15/arts/how-much-is-that-dancer-in-the-program.html?_r=0 That was in 2004. Have things changed? If sponsorship money does not pay a dancer's salary, and is instead routed to their general funds, then why is a donor given credit for sponsoring a specific dancer? Simply for the prestige? Link to comment
nanushka Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 7 minutes ago, ABT Fan said: If sponsorship money does not pay a dancer's salary, and is instead routed to their general funds, then why is a donor given credit for sponsoring a specific dancer? Simply for the prestige? My guess is that it's what fondoffouettes described above (quoting from a previous page –– don't know how to do that on here): It's a pretty great enticement to potential donors to say "Give $100,000 and attach your name to a dancer." A bit more exciting than having your name engraved on a brick in the wall. The benefit to ABT must outweigh the annoyance of entitled donors. In reality, money is fungible; in terms of perceptions, not so much. So although the money goes into the general pot, there would be a real perception, with real consequences, that the donor is indeed paying (at least part of) the dancer's salary. Link to comment
maps Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 (edited) delete Edited July 11, 2017 by maps Link to comment
Balletwannabe Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 Buying a "meaningful relationship"? Sounds creepy. Link to comment
Natalia Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 5 minutes ago, Balletwannabe said: Buying a "meaningful relationship"? Sounds creepy. Exactly. It's the Paris Opera's Foyer de la Danse all over again. Link to comment
Kathleen O'Connell Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 23 minutes ago, ABT Fan said: To me, sponsoring a dancer implies a direct relationship of some sort (with a lot of sticky implications) whereas giving money to costumes or any other broader fund does not. It's perception. And, for a board member I think that's important. However, in this link that was posted above earlier, then Executive Director Rachel Moore said this regarding sponsorship donations: ''The money doesn't go to pay that dancer's salary...''That's not what this is about. It's about supporting the company.'' http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/15/arts/how-much-is-that-dancer-in-the-program.html?_r=0 That was in 2004. Have things changed? If sponsorship money does not pay a dancer's salary, and is instead routed to their general funds, then why is a donor given credit for sponsoring a specific dancer? Simply for the prestige? It's roughly equivalent to naming rights on a part of a building. The donation didn't pay for the elevator lobby (e.g., the Schwartz East Elevators at NYU's Tisch Hospital) or the refreshment bar (e.g., the Metropolitan Opera's Grand Tier Revlon Bar) but that's where the donor's name is prominently displayed. Similarly, Mr. & Mrs. Buck McBling get to see their name next to Sheezno Fontaine's photo in the program. I find the whole "Here's my money, now where will we put my name" thing unseemly, frankly, but then we do have Carnegie Hall ... Link to comment
ABT Fan Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, Kathleen O'Connell said: ....Mr. & Mrs. Buck McBling..... LOL! Link to comment
Kathleen O'Connell Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 1 minute ago, Natalia said: This whole "naming thing" first caught my attention with Vilar..."Vilar Floral Hall" and the rest. (Of course, we know what happened to him.) Nothing as tacky as a "meaningful relationship" with a dancer of choice. It really is just ... oh, I can't even. There has always been patronage and always will be, but this smacks of treating your artists like fund-raising commodities. Link to comment
Natalia Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 I read somewhere that all of the private ballet companies in Japan expect each dancer to sell a certain number of tickets (to friends & family) to each performance. Whoever doesn't make her tally is kicked off the corps. They're literally forced to sell a book of tickets. If a father was wealthy, he'd just write a check for the value of all the tickets, to keep his daughter on the stage. This included well-known companies like Asami Maki & Tokyo Ballet. Kumakawa's troupe may be the only exception. I'm open to corrections...this was 4-5 years ago that I read it. Link to comment
abatt Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 (edited) Unfortunately, the dancers are not necessarily first and foremost artists, at least at ABT. They are equally, or perhaps primarily, fundraising and or ticket sales commodities. The better you are at increasing ticket sales, attracting publicity to the company, or and attracting money to the company, the more secure your position, regardless of artistry or lack thereof. Edited July 7, 2017 by abatt Link to comment
Natalia Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 I hope that pre-professional ballet academies are now teaching fund raising & marketing! Who knows how many wonderful corps (or soloist) dancers have left the profession prematurely because of precisely this...they didn't sign up for this thing when they entered ballet school. Link to comment
sandik Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, nanushka said: Wow, that article is really eye-opening, and just dripping with subtext. There is so much attempt on so many people's parts to downplay the significance and implications of it all. I'm not at all as confident that those protections are sufficient. "Unsavory" seems like exactly the word for this system. When the article ran, the photo was a stock image of Patricia Barker in Chaconne, with a price tag photoshopped to her pointe shoe, marked $100,000. As you might imagine, it made for a swirl of comments in the dance world. I wound up writing an commentary for the Society of Dance History Scholars (I think they asked me because of the Barker photo) -- we had a big discussion here on BA, but I don't know where it is in the archive right now. Whether it's blunt or not, I thought that Rachel Moore's description was very clear. The donation may be labeled as a sponsorship for a particular dancer, but the money is pooled -- it's a donation in support of the company. Edited July 7, 2017 by sandik Link to comment
canbelto Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 Well back to Veronika's farewell ... apparently mass media didn't take up the story so now there's going to be flyers handed out and organized booing. Link to comment
aurora Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 5 minutes ago, canbelto said: Well back to Veronika's farewell ... apparently mass media didn't take up the story so now there's going to be flyers handed out and organized booing. Ugh booing AT her farewell? That will be charming Link to comment
canbelto Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 It's really unfortunate. Supporting Veronika is one thing but this sort of behavior will only hurt her future chances at dancing at another company and I can't believe the organizer has made the event so self-centered. Link to comment
fondoffouettes Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 (edited) What's most disturbing to me is that they are talking about shouting things "before the lights go down." Nothing should interfere with her performance or disturb the mood right before the Preghiera of all things. If they want to boo KM during the curtain calls, that would be far less egregious and at least somewhat isolated from the adulation Part will receive before and after. That said, I don't think booing has any place at a farewell performance. The other evening, a Part fan passed out roses to those sitting in the front of the theater to be thrown during the Mozartiana curtain calls. It could very well have been the same person who is organizing this "protest," but this was a much more positive way to focus one's energy. The effect was lovely. Throw flowers; don't shout at McKenzie! Edited July 7, 2017 by fondoffouettes Link to comment
vipa Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 21 minutes ago, canbelto said: Well back to Veronika's farewell ... apparently mass media didn't take up the story so now there's going to be flyers handed out and organized booing. Oh no. This will not do anyone any good. ABT is not going to re-hire Part and I could cause others to think twice before working with her. IMO not a good way to celebrate her final performance with ABT. It also puts the rest of the dancers in an awkward position. Link to comment
LadyBubbles Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 Yes, this could definitely hurt Part. I know others have mentioned that dancers are not responsible for what their fans might do (and I agree), BUT she's certainly not helping the situation by posting on the organizers FB page. If anything, she should be flat out demanding that they don't do anything about t and just ask for support on Saturday. I know, who am I to say what she "should" do? But if I were a director I wouldn't want to risk having a riot at a performance if I make a decision that upsets the fans. Again, my .02 Link to comment
canbelto Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 I just saw that they plan on booing "before the lights go down." That's awful. Mozartiana should be Veronika's moment and Veronika's alone. Any disruption will only take away from her rendition of one of the most beautiful ballets ever made. Link to comment
ABT Fan Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 Well, the one good thing about this person posting all of her protest plans on Facebook is that (hopefully) the Met will be prepared with a lot of extra security and ushers. I'd expect the lines to get in will be extra long as they check bags and purses for tomatoes and other paraphernalia. I'm actually really glad I won't be going. I'm sad I'll miss Part's final performance but I would not want to see her farewell turned into some fan's demented attempt at retribution. Link to comment
fondoffouettes Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, canbelto said: I just saw that they plan on booing "before the lights go down." That's awful. Mozartiana should be Veronika's moment and Veronika's alone. Any disruption will only take away from her rendition of one of the most beautiful ballets ever made. It's bad enough when the audience hasn't settled down enough before Mozartiana starts, let alone protesters shouting! Distractions during that opening section are just terrible. Edited July 7, 2017 by fondoffouettes Link to comment
nanushka Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, ABT Fan said: Well, the one good thing about this person posting all of her protest plans on Facebook is that (hopefully) the Met will be prepared with a lot of extra security and ushers. I'd expect the lines to get in will be extra long as they check bags and purses for tomatoes and other paraphernalia. I'm actually really glad I won't be going. I'm sad I'll miss Part's final performance but I would not want to see her farewell turned into some fan's demented attempt at retribution. Yes, this has all just reaffirmed my decision not to go, which was a difficult one to make. In the end, I decided that the last two performances I saw (Swan Lake and Monday's Mozartiana) were just such positive, fulfilling experiences that I'd prefer to just leave it at that. I'm terribly disappointed that I won't get to see her dance more in the coming years, but I've enjoyed many wonderful performances from her and I just don't want to be there for whatever happens on Saturday, even if it's a total anticlimax –– which would be sad enough on its own (because Veronika deserves a true farewell celebration –– though I understand she may not even want that). Link to comment
nanushka Posted July 7, 2017 Share Posted July 7, 2017 (edited) I have just posted on the "Videos" forum a link to a new video of Veronika's Dying Swan from an event at Michigan Opera Theatre in May. More info on my post there, but I hope it's okay to reference here as well for those fans who may be interested and might otherwise not see it. Edited July 7, 2017 by nanushka Link to comment
Recommended Posts