CriticalDance Forum

good old infoculture have come up with the goods again:<P>kudelka's reappointment: <A HREF="http://www.infoculture.cbc.ca/archives/dance/dance_05262000_kudelka.phtml" TARGET=_blank>http://www.infoculture.cbc.ca/archives/<BR>dance/dance_05262000_kudelka.phtml</A> <P>AND: the "ballet brawl" entire saga - a ten part interview-based artcle with both glasco and valerie wilder (NBofC CEO representing kudelka). apparently this has audio & video! <A HREF="http://www.infoculture.cbc.ca/archives/special_coverage/special_coverage_balletbrawl.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.infoculture.cbc.ca/archives/<BR>special_coverage/special_coverage_balletbrawl.html</A> <P><p>[This message has been edited by Stuart Sweeney (edited June 06, 2000).]

Ballet News Flash! Ballet News Flash! Ballet News Flash! The sun is shinning! The moon is beaming! Every single star in heaven is all a twinkle! For ballerina siren Kimberly Glasco’s toes will once again kiss the stage of the Hummingbird Centre! Madam Justice Katherine Swinton has upheld a ruling by Mr. Justice Dennis O’Leary who supported arbitrator Christopher Albertyn’s decision to reinstate Kimberly Glasco while her case for unlawful dismissal is decided. She will be back at the National Ballet of Canada as Dulcinea for Don Quixote come the fall. A role in which she absolutely shines in! Bravo Kimberly! Bravo! Bravo! If the NBoC had any imagination (which they don’t) they would cast the Ballet Doughboy (James Kudelka) as Sancho Panza (Don Quixote’s sidekick)! A part of me hopes that James Kudelka is indeed a man of his word. Full details of all the legal pooh can be read at <A HREF="http://www.kim-glasco.com" TARGET=_blank>www.kim-glasco.com</A> (Home of the Goddess of Ballet!)<P>Signed, Michael Goldbarth (unbiased ballet correspondent for Criticaldance)!<BR><p>[This message has been edited by Michael Goldbarth (edited June 07, 2000).]

My Letter to the World!<BR> <BR>* Somewhere up in heaven, Martha Graham is smiling! <P>Monday’s Child is fair of face<BR>Tuesday’s Child is full of grace<BR>Wednesday’s Child is full of woe<BR>Thursday’s Child has far to go<BR>Friday’s Child is loving and giving<BR>Saturday’s Child must work hard for a living<BR>But the child that is born on the Sabbath day<BR>Is bonny and blithe, and good and gay.<P>The above nursery rhyme would no doubt turn the Ballet Doughboy’s (Kudelka’s) belly. The only part he can relate to is working hard for a living and the last word of the rhyme. For some ungodly reason Kudelka is obsessed with subjecting us to his dark personality. Too many of his ballets are impossible to explain, depressing and just plain boring. <P>After reading the below, I’m sure you’ll agree with me that Kimberly Glasco is Tuesday’s Child (full of grace).<P>After I couldn’t find my favorite Sugar Plum Fairy in the casting for the Nutcracker (dated Tuesday, November 17th, 1998), I could hear the bells tolling for Kimberly Ann Glasco. Sure enough, on Tuesday, December 1st, James Kudelka gave Kimberly Glasco the pink boot and slip! On Tuesday, February 2nd, 1999, the Globe & Mail published a very cruel editorial entitled “Dance Ballerina Dance.” A title I used for an earlier letter to the editor which sadly went unpublished. The unnamed Globe & Mail author gave readers the impression that Kimberly Glasco was a grandmother in creaky pointe shoes. On Tuesday, April 6th, the meeting of the ballet’s members over the Glasco dispute was canceled. Coincidentally, “An Evening with Kimberly” was held on Tuesday, April 13th.<P>For you non-believers in fate and nursery rhymes, Madam Justice Katherine Swinton upheld a ruling by Mr. Justice Dennis O’Leary on TUESDAY, June the 6th, 2000, that Kimberly Glasco (Tuesday’s Child) be reinstated while her case for unlawful dismissal is decided.<BR>-edited to replace 4 of michael's editing messages with one! <p>[This message has been edited by grace (edited June 07, 2000).]

good point dirk , that last one... <P>and michael: look, you're a sweetie - but WHAT are you on?

I can tell you the line is longer to hire Kudelka than a 39 year old dancer who does not play well with others.<P>And Michael, while I agree that Kudelka has not handled himself with the level of character one would like, no one discusses the support not only the Bd, but dancer and former dancers (most notably Ms. Kain) have expressed for him and his decision. Kudelka should teach and chor. and not give interviews ... I think we can all agree to that, but when an artist is attacked for their art, the lashing out is NEVER pretty.<P>Unlike Kudelka, Glasco has, IMHO, engaged in a pathetic media suck up (the Save Kim Glasco site is truly tragic) and any dignity is lost. I am not talking about the legal push. That is her right to proceed and NBoC to defend (and all the hoopla about what is said in either furtherance or defense of a claim in Ct as "terrible" or "How could he/she say that!" reaction is niave on the workings of litigation) but the whining and letters to NBoC after her recent Ct. success (and posted on her web site!) really give me pause.<BR>

With all due respect, PINOCHET!?!? It's dance not human rights violations!<P>The never threatened to resign is quixotic in that the whole point is that she did not have a job to return too. When Kirk Peterson was "released" did he go around lambasting the Harford Ballet? No! From all reports, rather difficult to work with (he fired most of the company if memory serves me correctly) but thankfully he is still creating and will lead another company in the future should he choose to.<P>The third point about Ms. Kain being "carried" is truly remarkable. Was Fonteyn "carried" in her later years? People clamoured for Kain to dance and wept during her performance to the end, where many more tears fell. Ms. Glasco was a nice dancer , to be sure, but never, never, NEVER kain.<P>It is the incessant theme that runs through these threads that there is a "right" to dance. As I have said before, Kudelka has not articulated his position well, but the bare essence of his points are the vision I have for an Artistic Director of a company that does not have a set style that it must follow.<P>I like a great deal of the Kudelka stuff I've seen, but I've never met the man and I certainly do not enjoy the press swirling around a fantastic company, but the blame lies, IMHO, with Ms. Glasco. My arm is not being twisted and there is a view that when a dancer chooses to work with a large dance company, loyalty does not go far. Choice. That is what this is about. Does an Artistic Director retain the right to choose who dances for him/her. Of course! If he retaliated for an opinion in a Bd meeting, he was wrong. I still don't think he is required to work with her. If he fired her for giving derogatory or dericisive statements outside the Bd setting, she'd be gone in any setting. If she cannot dance the parts, there can be no argument.<P>

shag: your tone in this matter quite frightens me. <P>but of course i am endeavouring to understand your point of view, because you are obviously already a respected member of this team, so i want to be able to read your words and interact with you without feeling intimidated.<P>i cannot follow this part, so with THAT aim in mind (mutual understanding) please could you explain your meaning?<P>"the bare essence of his points are the vision I have for an Artistic Director of a company that does not have a set style that it must follow." (thanks)<P>also, my understanding is that the glasco supporters' site is just that: a site put up by her supporters (as distinct from her) but, ...you know, i don't know any more than what i read, so i could have misunderstood that...

Grace<P>I do apologize for any frustration on my part being taken in a "frightening" manner. Throughout the web, this issues has been treated, IMHO, in a most one sided manner. Michael Goldbarth, for example, identifies himself (in a most toungue in cheek way, I think) as correspondent to critical dance, yet has painted Kudelka as the black knight. I do not mean to single anyone out, b/c the points on one side of the argument have been exhaustively discussed yet I am the only one who seems to give two hoots about the damage cause by the perverbial inmates running the aslym.<P>Here are my basic points:<P>Kudelka, unlike Martin, does not have an established "style" that must be adheared to. He is tasked with creating his own "vision"/personality etc. The pressure is increased in such a high profile company.<P>_I_ beleive, and I know its just my opinion (I had no idea just how singular it was), that an Artistic Director has the right to choose his/her dancers. As offensive as it is, many artistic directors steer away from dancers of colour b/c it does not fit their vision. I think this limits their boundaries and their work, but even this is arguably permissable.<P>I beleive thatr an employer has a right to release any employee for any reason as long as the employee is not be sent out b/c they are a member of a protected class. That is not the case w/ NBoC, but I thought you should know my opinion on this as it may offend some who are not employers or who are used to being in a country with, IMHO, extreme labour laws.<P>What I meant by "bare essence of his [Kudelka's] points" was that at the heart of his stupid comments was that fact that he is held accountable for the product and he should have ultimate control. It is butt on the line and he must be allowed to pick the colours he paints with.<P>Re: the Glasco site, she seems to be more involved than at a cursory level. Furthermore, her own letters to NBoC, I find, tragic and transparent.<P>I do think Dirks point about "straw man" may be a correct one, however I do not believe that it can be tagged on the "Kudelka camp". Frankly, I don't think a Kudelka camo exists. Kudelka is sticking up for himself, poorly at times, and the NBoC is covering its own backside. They choose which side best suited them and I am sure a lengthy discussion of "the best thing for the company" was had at the Bd level before the final position was taken. The assumption on this and other discussion groups seems to imply that Kudelka painted them into a corner. While not being in the room at the time, it is unimaginable that this Bd. is a puppet to its artistic director.<P>The statement regarding "fired for the wrong reasons" is much too braod and I think peoples views regarding how much an employee ABSENT AN EXISTING CONTRACT is to be protected and the legal implication. I happen to think the labour laws on my home country coddle way too much. That is my opinion and relates to all employment, not just dance. It pervades my opinions on this matter and in some peoples minds, may make my opinions biased beyond the point of consideration.<P>The big point of Dirk's last point that is flat out wrong is this statement:<P>"Neither Kudelka nor his supporters seem to understand that times have changed, and this sort of behavior, like sexual harassment or starvation wages, no longer cuts it."<P>To cut to the chase: sexual harassment is wrong, starvation wagaes, as he calls it, are not. Period. The element of choice makes the difference as a matter of law. I hate to say it, but morality and loyalty do not play any part in the analysis. If Glasco did not get rehired (and that's what we are talking about) at 100k b/c she was difficult, devisive, old or Kudelka just didn't like her, that's permissable. If he fired solely for her role DURING Bd. meetings as a rep., then the retaliatory nature of it ARGUABLY makes it impermissable.<P>Re: employability, Dirk is correct that money is a factor in any AD position, but any press is good press for smaller companies and I guarantee Kudelka would find work somewhere. We need to look no further than Fernando Bujones being hired as AD of Southern Ballet Thaetre in Orlando as proof. He has never distinguished himself as an AD or Chor, despite many attempts post performing, yet his name and the press surrounding this fantastic dancer has given him work despite past letdowns, difficulties etc.<P>On the Kain issue, I think we should agree to disagree. Kain was and will always be the first lady of Canadian dance. Any AD for NBoC would have done the exact same thing and to taint her opinions in this matter implies she is a robot, which she has never been. She owes no one in Canada the way that they owe her and if she thought that Glasco had been done a disservice, she would have said so and Glasco, I assure you, would have been rehired.<P>

oh boy, you two may have to step outside...! <P>shag: i agree with THIS. i don't think you are alone in this view (up to a point) - <BR>"I beleive ... that an Artistic Director has the right to choose his/her dancers."<P>this relates directly to this: "(the) fact (is) that he is held accountable for the product and he should have ultimate control."<BR>-fair enough (bearing in mind that the board is ALSO held accountable).<P>my own personal opinion is that THIS is going TOO far (my emphasis here): "I beleive that an employer has a right to release any employee **FOR ANY REASON** as long as the employee is not be sent out b/c they are a member of a protected class."<P>i can understand and sympathise with your point, which i think is that he who pays basically should get to choose (yes?...). but i DO believe that some labour laws, such as we now have in THIS century, ARE social improvements (i THINK this is what dirk is saying). and THAT brings us to:<P>"If he fired (her) solely for her role DURING Bd. meetings as a rep., then the retaliatory nature of it ARGUABLY makes it impermissable." - i think this IS the impression that some of us, including me, have gained. <P>all the rest of kudelka's protestations don't ring true to me, but i'm not there...maybe i'm missing something. i notice though, that the courts seem to be taking this same view: that the reason/s he fired her were not acceptable.<P>re "it is unimaginable that this Bd. is a puppet to its artistic director." - well, i haven't got a clue about THIS board, but (with regard to renewing his contract) it IS imaginable that they MAY have been afraid to go it alone without an artistic director, and believed they didn't have time to get another of sufficient stature quick enough. it is also possible that there MAY be some personal friendships or loyalties involved there - i'm only guessing, having observed the way of the world, up to now in my life... it is also possible that he intimidates THEM...he seems to behave like part big bully/ part childish crybaby. some of his statements are extremely manipulative ('i'll kill myself before i cast her' sort-of-thing)...the board just MAY be AFRAID of what he would do, legally or even personally. this is ALL pure conjecture.<P>i think it's probably best to stay away from arguing about other people like kain, but i agree that one would HOPE someone of her stature has an independent mind, and shouldn't feel she is owing anybody anything, after HER contribution to canadian ballet.<P>i would like to add that while i know nothing of bujones' reputation as a director, his stature (maybe that's the wrong word, considering how tiny he is! )...his ranking and respect as a performer put him in an entirely different class than kudelka : they don't belong in the same sentence. <P>that, however, means NOTHING about his possible abilities in any other field of endeavour...it's a real shame in dance that it's assumed that the best dancers may make the best ANYTHING else..teachers, directors, whatever.<P>ultimately, i agree with this (from dirk): <BR>"I sympathasize with your insistence on autonomy for AD's - though I would not have chosen Kudelka as poster boy for this cause, as much for his limited artistic vision as for his poor manners - but...times they are a'changin'... "<P>

in the second post in THIS thread: <A HREF="http://www.criticaldance.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/000041.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.criticaldance.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/000041.html</A> <BR>you will find an interview with Reid Anderson, about becoming/being an Artistic Director, which may be of interest to participants or readers in this thread...

Hands up if you’d like to volunteer to be the next dancer’s representative to the board at the National Ballet of Canada. What?! No volunteers? What gives? Well, Kimberly Glasco was a former rep to the board. Glasco spoke up about low salaries for the corps de ballet as well as lavish spending on Kudelka’s Ego err Swan Lake and look what happened to her: No farewell season, No farewell performance, Kudelka wouldn’t even let her finish the subscription season! All she got was one final performance for Manon in Montreal. Some thanks for 18 years of corns, bunions and blisters at the National Ballet of Canada! <P>Let’s see what happened to Glasco’s replacement. Jennifer Fournier made the mistake of getting pregnant and now she’s moving to New York with her husband. Hopefully Fournier will be able to continue her career at New York City Ballet. Though I highly doubt she will continue as a principal. As for the male rep to the board, James O’Connor apparently left the NBoC on his own accord to pursue other dance interests. A very big surprise considering how vocal O’Connor was defending James Kudelka’s right to fire Glasco. In fact, nobody brown-nosed more for the Ballet Doughboy. I never thought O’Connor would rise above the rank of second soloist. I never thought all that much of his dancing. I did however think he contributed in many other ways to the NBoC: public speaking, fund-raising and teaching. That’s why I was very surprised to hear of his leaving. Even more so, when you pause to consider the dearth of quality male dancers on the NBoC’s roster made worse by the departure of Johan Persson. <P>The departure of Fournier and O'Connor has me writing out loud whether the Board exacted revenge for the dancers penning a letter to members of the ballet explaining their position in the Glasco dispute. A letter which arrived in my mailbox in March of 1999 with no return address. It ended with a PS: “We feel it is important to stress that this letter is an independent initiative taken by the dancers of the National Ballet.” Perhaps the dancers hiring of a lawyer to represent them at the arbitration hearing was the final proverbial straw. Who knows anything when it comes to the NBoC? The laws of logic do not exist here. They’ve blown about a million dollars trying to keep Glasco’s toes off their stage and now they’re suing Now Magazine for libel. Coincidentally they’re seeking $1 million in damages. Also named in the lawsuit are those who placed an ad comparing the firing of Glasco to the dismissal of Jewish artists in Nazi Germany. <P>The National Ballet of Canada will win this suit and be awarded damages for one loony. That was not a misprint! The NBoC will win the suit and be compensated to the tune of one loony! My logic for the loony award:<P>(a) NOW did publish an apology. <P>(b) The judge will have to consider freedom of speech.<P>(c) The ad states: “IN 1933, Bruno Walter, Vasily Kandinsky, Alexander Granach, Fritz Kreisler, and Kurt Weil were dismissed...not for Artistic Reasons.” <P>Weil was misspelled with only one “l.” Kurt Weil was a composer, Bruno Walter was a music director, Alexander Granach was an actor, and Fritz Kreisler was a violinist. All fled Nazi Germany for reasons of survival. That makes the ad in very bad taste NOT libel for $1 million. The ad went on to say: “IN 1998, Kimberly Glasco was dismissed...not as in 1933, but still not for Artistic Reasons.”<P>The key wording here is “not as in 1933.” <P>(d) I seriously doubt more than 50% of NOW readers actually made the connection who actually read the ad. <P>(e) It will be very difficult for the NBoC to prove they’ve been harmed by this. How many of NBoC subscribers do you think read the very left wing NOW? The board actually made matters worse by launching the lawsuit. Without the suit, the whole matter would have been quickly forgotten. All they’re doing is drawing more bad publicity upon themselves. Exactly what the National Ballet of Canada does NOT need. <P>------------------<BR>Michael Goldbarth<BR>-'edited' by Grace, purely to replace 3 edit messages by 1.<p>[This message has been edited by grace (edited June 11, 2000).]

michael, i probably shouldn't even bother saying this, because i realise you get a bit carried away by your passion for dance and your passion for words ...but it occurs to me that SOME people, most especially the lady herself, might find it offensive that you refer to her as making "the mistake" of getting pregnant. she well may not wish it to be seen THAT way! <P>i found the idea of the NOW ad in extremely bad taste. i still am unaware who put it there, though...do YOU know?<P>also, i think it would actually help our understanding if you explained what the letter SAID....?<P>thanks for your help!

Sorry, this was old news. I thought everyone knew. The dancers hired a lawyer to represent them at the arbitrator’s hearing. 40 out of 44 signed a letter supporting James Kudelka’s right to fire Glasco. James O’Connor in particular was quite vocal during the proceedings. He interrupted arbitrator Christopher Albertyn several times. The dancers threatened a walk-out if Glasco returns. As for the letter dancers sent out to members of the ballet, they urged them to support the board and told them they had asked Glasco to step down as their rep to the board. <P>As for my comments concerning Jennifer Fournier, I was obviously being sarcastic. If she wants to have a baby that’s fine with me. By writing “Jennifer Fournier made the mistake of getting pregnant” I was intimating the NBoC was not happy for her bringing a baby ballerina into the world. I believe there is an unwritten rule in all ballet companies that ballerinas becoming pregnant is in bad taste. All you have to do is look at what happened to Barbara Moore of Alberta Ballet. As far as I’m concerned she was fired for baby fat not for artistic reasons. <P>Of course, we can all recall dancers who have become pregnant and continued their careers. However, I don’t think their companies were pleased with their decision. It wouldn’t surprise me to hear of an artistic director asking a ballerina to abort her baby for the benefit of the company. <P>William Hechter, a lawyer and friend of Glasco, along with J. Doe 1 and 2 are named in the NBoC $1 million lawsuit. <BR><P>------------------<BR>Michael Goldbarth

Below is a letter written by Allen C. Marple, former chairman of the board for the National Ballet of Canada. The NBoC actually mailed this letter to all of its members. Some of the dancers along with the PR staff of the NBoC agree 100% with the contents of the letter and claim it to be beautifully written. As you can see below it is far from beautifully written. If you don’t believe me, run a grammar check on Microsoft Word and see for yourself! Allen Marple is no writer, no ballet expert, and a poor excuse as chairman of the NBoC’s board. My comments are enclosed in brackets. <P>January 22, 1999<P>Dear Friend of the National Ballet:<P>(Cheap stock phrase) As you are aware, (How did you know I knew of Kimberly’s dismissal? Spooky!) the decision has been made by the National Ballet of Canada to not (not to) renew the contract of Kimberly Glasco, Principal Dancer, when her contract expires June 30. Regrettably, some misunderstandings appear to have arisen surrounding this decision, and the National Ballet of Canada would like to try and clear these up.<P>The National Ballet, the board of directors, and Artistic Director James Kudelka consider Ms. Glasco a talented dancer—Her years of service at the National Ballet, one of the world’s premier ballet companies, attest to her gifts and abilities. (I would not have used a dash in the above sentence) (Cliché) Nevertheless, an artistic decision was made by Mr. Kudelka, with counsel from his artistic staff, not to renew Ms. Glasco’s contract when it expires.<P>As is (normal) Correction = (the norm) in the creative arts, this artistic decision is the prerogative of any artistic director. These judgments are an important part of the ongoing planning process, (incorrect use of comma) to ensure the company’s continued artistic vitality. Each year, decisions are made as to who will remain with the company and whose contracts will not be renewed. All these decisions are made in accordance with the company’s collective agreement with Canadian Actors’ Equity Association.<P>At the end of 1998, Ms. Glasco was one of several dancers - six in fact - who were informed that their contracts are not being renewed. (Clean it up)<P>Correction = At the end of 1998, Ms. Glasco was one of six dancers informed that their contracts are not being renewed.<P>Ms. Glasco is still scheduled to perform in Manon in Montreal as part of the ballet’s current season. In addition, in recognition of her contribution, she was offered the opportunity to perform in a production of Giselle during the 1999-2000 season - a high profile farewell performance which will showcase Ms. Glasco’s dancing. (According to Glasco she was offered nothing.)<P>(Run-on sentence) Both Ms. Glasco’s scheduled performance and the offer of a farewell performance still stand, and, until the end of her contract on June 30, 1999, she remains a member of the company, with pay. <P>(Correction) Both Ms. Glasco’s scheduled performance and the offer of a farewell performance still stand. She remains a member of the company, with pay until the end of her contract (June 30, 1999).<P>Upon completion of her contract, she will receive severance as provided for in our collective agreement.<P>Ms. Glasco’s attendance and/or participation in meetings of the National Ballet’s board of directors has not been a factor in the artistic decision not to renew her contract. Nor has her age; (incorrect use of semicolon) (This is great opportunity for you to use the dash) <P>Correction: <P>Ms. Glasco’s attendance and/or participation in meetings of the National Ballet’s board of directors has not been a factor in the artistic decision not to renew her contract—nor has her age.<P>The National Ballet would like to emphasize that the decision is a judgment made by the Artistic Director, with advice from his artistic staff—a judgment he is empowered by the board of directors to make as part of his role with the company.<P>(Better) The National Ballet would like to emphasize that the decision is a judgment made by the Artistic Director, with advice from his artistic staff. A judgment he is empowered by the board of directors to make as part of his role with the company.<P>The National Ballet of Canada is this country’s precious gift to the world of dance. James Kudelka will continue to honour our classical tradition and also encourage the creation of innovative ballet.<P>It is regrettable that misunderstandings have arisen, and that a normal renewal process in the company has become burdened with controversy. (I’m not comfortable with the 2 thats back to back.)<P>We look forward to an outstanding season, and we hope it includes the participation of Ms. Glasco in her final months with the company.<P>(On a final note: Allen Marple should try and cut down on his over use of passive sentences)<P>Sincerely,<P>Allen Marple<BR>Chairman<BR>The National Ballet Board of Directors<P><P>------------------<BR>Michael Goldbarth

thanks for the instant answers, michael: 'on the ball', as usual! <P>re this bit:"I believe there is an unwritten rule in all ballet companies that ballerinas becoming pregnant is in bad taste." - OK, i understand what you were meaning to say in your own inimitable way, about NBoC & Fournier, BUT, i also believe that this attitude you speak of is a relic of the distant past -and IF it still exists in canada or america today, then i really think it's an problem THERE, not a universal one...<P>thank you very much for explaining about the letters.<P>about the NOW suit, i didn't know you COULD have J.Doe...how strange, what exactly does that mean? do they know who #1 & #2 are, and they're being legally concealed somehow, or they just don't know?<P>boy, michael, i hope you never take to MY use of commas, 'that's, etcetera, as you've done here. i know you have a real talent with words, but i don't think it advances your argument to trash the letter on grammatical grounds - it's just confusing. at least, it IS to me. p.s. i try to write here conversationally, more so than grammatically correctly, but if *I* already feel the need to justify my expression like this, then this is an example of the effect your over-zealousness has on the reader!!! <P>luv ya heaps! and thanks for all the good info.<P>p.s. this is actually the first time in this whole saga that i have become specifically aware that her contract was 'not renewed', as distinct from her being fired...<P>