ABT, which is controlled by David Koch, is exploring the possibility of performing at The David H. Koch Theater, which is controlled by David Koch and is the home to NYCB. This is a clear sign that the big money supporting ballet in this city wants to have one, not two, ballet companies depending on its deep pockets.
Both ABT and NYCB dance Balanchine, Ratmansky, Petipa (sort of), Millepied, Wheeldon, and Robbins. The seasons presented by both companies have slowly continued to approach each other in terms of the balance of mixed repertory and full length content. If ABT and NYCB share repertory and share venue and share donors and share audiences and attract the same kind of dancers, what's not to argue that sharing administration, labor pool, and artistic pool isn't a sound direction to take?
ABT is struggling mightily and futilely under Kevin McKenzie who now has become as celebrity obsessed as Kelvin MacKenzie – Rupert's discovery who found a niche in the publishing world by writing tabloid headlines like "Freddie Starr ate my hamster." ABT's board has failed to address McKenzie's inabilities to guide the company on a course of organic growth and doesn't have the balls to install an artistic director who can.
ABT's subscription to The Met Opera House runs out after the 2015 season. Let's hope that David Koch's subscription runs out before then, so to speak.
"ABT's subscription to The Met Opera House runs out after the 2015 season."
Is that really true? Sources?
Posted by: sillypants | May 31, 2012 at 04:43 PM
According to the NYT today. Click on the link in the first line.
Posted by: Haglund | May 31, 2012 at 04:45 PM
"The seasons presented by both companies have slowly continued to approach each other in terms of the balance of mixed repertory and full length content."
If this is true, they seem still quite far apart to me. I see the two companies as filling two very different niches in the NYC opera scene.
Posted by: nanushka | May 31, 2012 at 07:25 PM
Hi Nanushka. They certainly should be filling two very different niches, but their differences are slowly disappearing as each company competes for market share. NYCB has been offering more and more full lengths lately while ABT has been trying its best to appear innovative with some real losers by Millepied, Barton, Stallings, and even Ratmansky's "Dumbarton" while keeping its masterpieces in cold storage. Over the next year, both companies will present Swan Lake, Apollo, Symphony in C, Midsummer's Night Dream/The Dream, and while ABT is presenting Cranko's Onegin, Peter Martins announces that he will choreograph to the music from the opera Onegin. In recent seasons, both companies have performed Sleeping Beauty, Romeo and Juliet, Theme and Variations, Duo Concertant, Fancy Free, and of course they now present competing Nutcrackers in New York. The distinctive niches are starting to blend, sadly.
Posted by: Haglund | May 31, 2012 at 07:59 PM
From the NYT article, it sounds as if the Koch Theater approached ABT, hoping to fill its (the theater's) empty weeks now that City Opera has abandoned ship. Alas, isn't everything for sale in today's world?
IMHO, the ideal would be for each company to remain true to its original mission, building on its unique mission in its individual way.
However, at the risk of repeating myself, I must ask, and not rhetorically, isn't everything for sale in today's world?
Posted by: Angelica Smith | June 01, 2012 at 04:10 PM
It seems so. The Atlantic's April issue touched on this in
What Isn't for Sale?
Posted by: Haglund | June 01, 2012 at 05:31 PM
If the competing niches are blending it doesn't explain why I couldn't give away my extra 1st Ring, Row A seat to Double Feature to any of the old ladies trying to nab an extra ticket to see ABT the same night. They had no interest in NYCB. They preferred overacting and miming, elaborate sets and traditional costumes to dancing. I realize the evidence is anecdotal but a more serious analysis would reveal the products really are quite different.
And unless I get some $$$ too it's still The NY State Theater. Next thing you'll be calling Shea Stadium by some corporate overlords name.
Posted by: Ted | July 03, 2012 at 02:49 PM
Dear Angelica, noting has changed since people began to barter. So we can stop pretending "everything is for sale today" as if it weren't so 200 years ago. At least some countries don't (directly) sell people anymore.
Why is it wrong for State Theater to approach ABT ? I'm sure they don't like competing for a few weeks in the Spring season. Didnt ABT exercise a non-compete a few months back to prevent two of their performers from appearing at State Theater ?
That said, AB can use it to negotiate with The Met. ABT is going anywhere.
Posted by: Ted | July 03, 2012 at 11:15 PM