At least when the New York City Opera was going down the tubes, the New York Times chronicled the financial and artistic troubles early on. Throughout NYCO’s long and painful demise, the Times sought out people who were closely connected to the world of opera for illuminating feedback. They quoted NYCO’s former general director and principal conductor who blamed “inconsistent board leadership” for the company’s failures. They quoted the respected opera and theater director, Francesca Zambello, who spoke of sadness at the "slow demise of what’s so important to us” and "to think that New York City cannot support two companies because of the board’s mishaps is a very depressing fact.” The Times sought out the perspectives of directors of other major opera companies such as William Mason, the general director of the Lyric Opera of Chicago who told the paper, “I have the impression they’re going into this half blind,” and “Boards don’t understand how opera companies work” and “A board’s job is to provide oversight.” The Times observed that “For months hints of trouble have been emerging” in connection with Gerard Mortier’s decision to leave NYCO almost before he got started with it.
There was actual news reporting and fact digging by the Times as NYCO’s internal organs failed one after the other until it wheezed its final breath and slumped over dead. There was a sense that the Times’ reporters understood the importance and impact of NYCO’s lingering death and felt the responsibility to report it.
But for some reason, the Times has not been interested in or has been incapable of reporting the similar downward spiral of American Ballet Theatre with its loss of identity and unique voice, waning commitment to quality classicism, internal troubles, failure to maintain sufficient and competent artistic staff, massive artistic defections, and the Fosamaxic build-up of its crumbling bones through the use of guest artists. Fosamax, as we now know, makes the bones even more brittle and prone to fracture.
ABT began its build-up of guest artists after Julio Bocca retired in 2006. The next internal promotion to the rank of principal did not occur for five years. In 2006, revenues hit $49+ million. Five years later revenues had plummeted to $36 million. Today – seven years into David Koch’s attempted transformation of ABT into a company of nomadic and mostly unimpressive guest artists who dance in front of ABT’s faceless company – ABT’s revenues are in the red hole by a whopping -18%. By contrast, over the same period, New York City Ballet’s revenues have risen by 7-1/2%.
ABT cannot blame the economy for its woes. It can only blame itself. Major talent continues to defect while others just hang on with hope that some sense of meritocracy will magically seep into the corrupt pay to play system at ABT where the preferred currency is media attention.
Unlike the Times’ classical music and opera critics who have practical experience and education in the art forms that they cover, the Times’ critics who write about classical ballet are merely sideline observers with megawatt blowhorns. Their primary mission is to convince readers of their own authority rather than write about performances that occur on stage. They are, at best, good fakes in a world that promotes fake it until you make it. When one of them writes something like First, some facts, that’s the first sign that you are about to read garbage. Usually, it’s no more than the writer trying to assert his faux authority with something like “I saw her in seven roles between 1977 and 1986” barely holding back from giving the reader the exact seven dates, the phases of the moon, and who was standing in the last row of the corps de ballet on those dates.
They have no appreciation of the importance or value of a classical dancer’s turnout, hip placement, arm and hand positions, epaulement, musical phrasing, proper use of head and eyes, proper use of delicacy versus boldness, consistency, quality of finishes, or the purity of a line that is clear and unimpeded by sharp elbows, winged or sickled feet, unattractive or misused profile, or bouncing boobs.
Believe it or not, when a ballerina strikes a pique arabesque the entire body is supposed to arrive in one piece. The boobs are not supposed to come trailing after nor are they supposed to jingle to their own independent musical notes once the dancer arrives at the arabesque. Anything that sticks out from the clear classical line shouldn’t be there – whether it’s a boob or a little finger or a fat pointe shoe box. Things that stick out don’t belong in classical ballet. That’s why the average body shouldn’t be promoted on the classical ballet stage but may function well on another dance stage such as contemporary ballet, broadway, or modern dance.
Nobody wants to pay $100 to sit in a theater and watch an average anything on the classical ballet stage - not an average body, not an average face - certainly not a homely one, not an average ability, not an average anything. We pay money to watch the extraordinary. We pay money to watch elite bodies achieve an aesthetic and artistry that we cannot ever achieve because of what we are not.
But today, dancers who don’t measure up to classical standards try to promote balletic gerrymandering. If they can’t win within the boundaries of the traditional classical district, they seek to relocate the boundaries in a direction that will give them a better chance of winning. They are never really concerned about advancing the art form; their concern is about advancing their own success and not being excluded because they don’t measure up to the requirements of classicism. It’s balletic gerrymandering. Dancers who lack partnering skills or theatrical weight want to take ballet in a new direction that won’t be so dependent on those elements and will allow them a greater opportunity for success. Dancers who cannot achieve the lines of classicism want to believe and be told that it’s not important or that the emphasis of classicism is in some way morally wrong. Choreographers want the respect that comes from working within classicism without actually working within its discipline.
Today, there is more chase for success than chase for artistry. The commitment to classicism is too difficult, too time consuming, and it doesn’t have enough of a pay-off in today’s culture. Worst of all, those who don’t understand it or can’t achieve it want to see it quietly die so that it no longer gets in the way of their own success.
The concluding paragraphs contain some of the most important comments about the current state of ballet and choreography I have seen in a very long time.
Posted by: Mathilde K | May 20, 2014 at 09:24 PM
Thank you, Mathilde.
Posted by: Haglund | May 20, 2014 at 10:01 PM
Haglund, this is so fracking brilliant that I may have to memorize it.
Posted by: dc | May 20, 2014 at 10:10 PM
Thanks, dc.
Posted by: Haglund | May 20, 2014 at 11:18 PM
I moved away from New York in 2011. One of my chief regrets was the end of my frequent balletgoing. But now I think it would have been more painful to watch ABT's demise in person, rather than tracking it through your blog. I think the tipping point around 2006 sounds right. It must have been no later than 2007 that I saw Stella one night, shining equally alongside Vishneva in Manon. I observed that not only had she continually refined her classicism, she had achieved virtuosity—quite a feat for a lyrical dancer. She is the unforgivable casualty. The canary in the mineshaft.
I saw Copeland as the Firebird in LA and felt she had stagnated, become a caricature of herself. Her signature roles for me were the Swan Lake pas de trois and Tharp. Not really a full repertoire.
I am visiting next week and have decided to boycott ABT and attend multiple performances at NYCB instead. I would like to support the dancers I love but I don't think I would be. I need to vote with my dollars.
This post reminds me quite a bit of Edwin Denby's criticism in Looking at the Dance. If we can't have newspapers, at least we have bloggers!
Posted by: Annie H. | May 21, 2014 at 12:01 PM
Thank you, Annie H.
I agree that Stella is McKenzie's "unforgivable casualty." Many do. We all have lost so much by not having the opportunity to see her lead Giselle, Sleeping Beauty, Swan Lake, and the balance of the classical repertory. McKenzie cannot now put her on stage in any of those roles, because her success would embarrass him just like Sarah Lane's success in Sleeping Beauty on the heels of Hee Seo's utter failure embarrassed him.
Posted by: Haglund | May 21, 2014 at 07:57 PM
Haglund, I'm not sure if you're aware, but it says on Ballet Philippines' website that Stella will dance in their Giselle this September (with Whiteside, but at least it's Stella, right?): http://ballet.ph/news/company-news/
Giselle will be part of The Blue Moon Gala, a fundraising series for the company: http://ballet.ph/shows/blue-moon-gala
Has she danced the title role before? I will pray for good weather, September is part of rainy/monsoon season.
Posted by: Meg | May 22, 2014 at 10:56 AM
Meg, thank you for those links! That is at once both incredible and horrifying. What a shame her partner couldn't be Jared or Eric Tamm or Joe Gorak or god, please, anyone else.
But yes, this could essentially be her full debut. She danced the Act II pdd with Sascha last year in Santa Fe to great acclaim. Witnesses said she was better than anyone else at ABT.
Unfortunately, this spring we are having Isabella Boylston's homely, unclassical dancing forced down our throats in Giselle along with imports who have no business stealing artistic opportunities away from our better dancers.
Posted by: Haglund | May 22, 2014 at 11:51 AM
Indeed, the last two paragraphs deserve to be copied and framed on the walls of every major ballet school in the world. Dancers today who don't have the talent to work within classical ballet tenets or even those who simply can't be bothered to do so, are now applauded for pushing the boundaries of classical ballet. Now instead of being hidden in the last line of the corps, they are artistic pioneers. The few truly classical ballerinas who respect their art are now described as old-fashioned or conventional. It's like people want to see circus freak shows.
"Nobody wants to pay $100 to sit in a theater and watch an average anything on the classical ballet stage - not an average body, not an average face - certainly not a homely one, not an average ability, not an average anything. We pay money to watch the extraordinary. We pay money to watch elite bodies achieve an aesthetic and artistry that we cannot ever achieve because of what we are not."
True, but to a certain degree. I think the emphasis today is more on appearance and doing tricks than on musicality and ability to dance. There is now only one type of aesthetics trumping all. The type which the Russians subscribe to today is responsible for much of the lack of artistry, since much of what the Russians do still influence others. Leggy, tall, extremely scrawny ballerina is now the prototype for ballerina both in public consciousness and also in ballet circles. Because they are so lanky, they are encouraged to be only excel in adagio work. So now you have specialists and typecasting. What about only decades ago, when a ballerina in order to be considered great, had to be able to dance a wide spectrum of roles? Eva Evdokimova, who could dance Sylph one night, then Raymonda the next, then Aurora the following, etc... When physicality is given undue emphasis over all other intangibles and criterion, ballet is nothing but decorative art, and that's what we have today with the Polina Semionovas of the world, beautiful but bland Polina. When ballerinas with beautiful bodies but tin ears can grace the center stage of major companies, you know ballet is going downhill.
Then you have the other extreme, the dancers who should have stuck to gymnastics school. This type is more in line with your last two paragraphs.
http://youtu.be/CvyBGyR5aTg
Posted by: Genna | May 22, 2014 at 02:39 PM
Haglund, your analysis is brilliant, albeit sad for ABT's current aesthetics. OK, so who has the 'bouncing boobs'among principal or solo ladies? Most seem pretty fit and lean...but I have my suspicions. Initials 'IB'?
Posted by: Jeannette | May 22, 2014 at 03:32 PM
Thanks for the clip, Genna. The "XXX" title is a tickler.
Interesting point that you make about specialization.
Ananiashvili and Bessmertnova were leggy and scrawny, but somehow they learned to excel in most everything.
Posted by: Haglund | May 22, 2014 at 03:51 PM
If someone wants to see average things being performed by average people - even regarding ballet - there's always the option to pay much less, if anything at all, and attend a show by any local ballet studio where everyone gets some stage time. For the joy of dance, they can even participate themselves, starting ballet as adult beginners. These things all have their due place somewhere and no offense to that. Maybe one can appreciate the "real thing" even better after that. However, such things should not take over the professional stages.
Posted by: Kallima | May 22, 2014 at 08:35 PM
Hi Kallima.
So true. Everyone should have the chance to dance just like every kid should have the opportunity to play in a baseball game. That doesn't mean that everyone should expect to collect money for it.
Hope you are well, and have found some ballet to attend in your part of the world.
H.
Posted by: Haglund | May 22, 2014 at 09:50 PM
H, you're welcome. Lol at "at once both incredible and horrifying" (but true). Happy, though, because this is Stella's dream role.
Posted by: Meg | May 22, 2014 at 11:03 PM
Meg, are you close enough to Manila that you might be able to attend Stella's Giselle? Are specific casting dates generally announced ahead of time?
Posted by: Haglund | May 22, 2014 at 11:10 PM
Quote:
"the Times’ critics who write about classical ballet are merely sideline observers with megawatt blowhorns. Their primary mission is to convince readers of their own authority rather than write about performances that occur on stage. They are, at best, good fakes in a world that promotes fake it until you make it. When one of them writes something like First, some facts, that’s the first sign that you are about to read garbage. Usually, it’s no more than the writer trying to assert his faux authority"
What you wrote, alas, rings very true.
Posted by: Mathilde K | June 02, 2014 at 05:14 AM
Hi, Mathilde. The Times tends to hold style over substance - a strong example of that being their ballet criticism.
Posted by: Haglund | June 02, 2014 at 07:24 AM