Okay, Okay!<P>I do think Ms. Glasco should never work with NBoC again, that a Bd and AD has a right to do what they did and Canadian labour laws are too protective to the detriment of the greater good ... but Kudelka's an idiot! Please, Please Please tell me this was a "vindictive Printer" (footnote see movie "Clerks")

yes, shag, they do! but the smarter thing would simply to have let her contract lapse at the point where it had finally run out and not renew; he had every right not to re-employ her and even though some dancers feel this is getting fired, of course we know it isn't; getting fired is not being allowed to finish the contract---and if *i say if with great reservation* he had been a classier person, he would have said something like, well look i know this may be a shock but i don't want to negatively impact future earnings for you, you've been here so long, and done such a great job, we really appreciate it, why don't we give you a grand gala sendoff, and a nice plaque, (you know what i mean, or something to that effect), and treated her nicely,and made her feel valued. instead of course all she got was the old heave-ho at the wrong time in the wrong way from a guy who doesn't seem to think about anyone or anything other than the world as it relates to him; and if you're responsible in the way an artistic director is for the wellbeing and work environment of so many people, you can't afford to be so narrow-minded!!--no the director isn't wholly responsible for everything in a dancer's life, but what he/she does affects them, and ought to be well thought out and considered. a director has to be in good part politician! (and the punctuation isn't for you, shag, i understand your points, just wishing the doofus would have done things both within the law and more sensitively-it could have been done, even if it would have taken a few weeks more than he wanted to. and then he would saved himself, the public, kimberly and the courts all of this. and maybe even scored himself some points. <BR>(that's a bah humbug for kudelka folks).<BR>

dirk, i can't imagine ANY company in the world taking on a 39-year old ballerina: it just doesn't happen. this would not have been an option, even for someone of her obviously high-level record.<P>and it appears to me that kudelka is more concerned about perceptions of his absolute authority, than his 'integrity'...<P>

aaah,.... it's kinda funny, dirk - especially when you think about those 'ballerinas' who signed the letter AGAINST her. this might be one for our 'funnies' page.

Thanks for the update.<P>Mercifully both camps seem to FINALLY realise the benefit to shutting the heck up.<P>I think the discussion of the current rep. and Kudelka's involvement in a variety of styles as was questioned earlier in the thread.<P>Has anyone seen the company recently? At the end of the day, the proof is in the pudding and we have no comments in this regard.

thanks dirk - a very unexpected twist, the way i see it...still, what do *I* know?!<P>i sure do bet that 'morale is low'!

MUST READ! MUST READ!<P>Michael Goldbarth's post - which now appears on page 3 of this thread: thanks michael for giving us an original copy!! <P>*Enjoy!* p.s. hold on to your seats, it's a rollicking ride!! <p>[This message has been edited by grace (edited May 29, 2000).]

very interesting. a lot of it probably true, and while i was reading it i got the sense that it might have been exhilirating to write. but writing like that reads more like conversation, and that kind of writing wouldn't do anybody's cause any good in the end; it's too full of the feeling of wanting to get somebody's a** to be effective as an aid to a defense on either side. <BR>just a thought there.

Martha Graham was oh so right! Movement never lies.<P>The National Ballet of Canada moves more truthfully than it speaks. I wish I could take credit for those words of wisdom but they belong to the late Antony Tudor—in the context of man of course. Below is a spoonful of truth for the NBoC. Open wide! Of course, that’s much easier written than done. You’d have better luck feeding a pill to a member of the feline race! Below is a passage from arbitrator Christopher Albertyn’s interim award to Kimberly Glasco lifted verbatim courtesy of <A HREF="http://www.kim-glasco.com." TARGET=_blank>www.kim-glasco.com.</A> <P>“When Ms. Glasco received notice of the non-renewal of her contract and her dispute was made public, Ballet spokespersons took the position that Ms. Glasco never raised financial concerns or the Swan Lake production with the board. For example, Ms. Wilder, the Ballet’s Executive Director, interviewed on January 5, 1999 on a radio program, ‘This Morning,’ broadcast by public radio throughout Canada by the CBC, said the following: ‘Ms. Glasco never did speak up at a board meeting, ever... The minutes will show it. Her claims are absolutely incorrect. In fact, they are baffling, quite honestly. She not only had never spoken up about our new production of Swan Lake, she never spoke up about fiscal responsibility or any such topic.’<P>The same position was advanced by the Ballet in an article in which Ms. Wilder was quoted in the Toronto Star, on January 7, 1999, and, on January 11, 1999, on the television program, ‘The National’, which is broadcast throughout Canada by the CBC. (This can be viewed in its entirety at <A HREF="http://www.infoculture.cbc.ca." TARGET=_blank>www.infoculture.cbc.ca.</A> Click on ‘Dance,’ ‘James Kudelka renews contract’ and then scroll down to ‘Brawl at the Ballet’ and click on it. During the interview Wilder said: ‘She (Glasco) never did speak out at a board meeting.’)<P>The position adopted by the Ballet was erroneous, and it appears that the Ballet has not publicly acknowledged the error. From a reading of the minutes it is clear that Ms. Glasco did raise these matters at two board meetings, as described.”<P>In a conversation with me (the author of the below ‘Dance Ballerina Dance,’) Allen Marple, former Chairman of the ballet’s Board of Directors, had the following to say about Glasco’s claims: “...she said she was fired because she spoke out at board meetings: well she did not! I can tell you precisely what she said in October which was: ‘Weren’t our reviews in New York marvelous!’ ...And then in December she said: ‘Didn’t we do La Bayadère beautifully!’ Which is, of course, patting herself on the back! She did do a good job. There’s no question about that.” <P>The above report from arbitrator Christopher Albertyn clearly confirms that Kim Glasco did indeed speak out at board meetings contrary to the above BS from the NBoC. This does not look good on the ballet. Their dishonesty strongly suggests Kudelka fired Glasco NOT for artistic reasons but because she spoke out at board meetings and didn’t support him when he ran for artistic director in 1995. For them to appeal a ruling that Glasco be temporarily reinstated while the arbitrator decides on the case is very cruel. This has dragged on far too long. Apparently the NBoC has bottomless pockets when it comes to destroying a living work of art. They certainly don’t pay to keep their talented dancers in Canada. If they did, Jaimie Tapper and Johan Persson would still be at the NBoC rather than the Royal Ballet. <P>The Ballet knows they are wrong. Kimberly Glasco is not artistically incompatible. James Kudelka is the only one at the Ballet who is artistically incompatible. The doughboy of the Ballet world is on an out of control ego trip paid for by the National Ballet of Canada, taxpayers and every ballet-goer who gives to the Ballet. If you disagree, ask yourself why Kudelka is so obsessed with redoing Petipa’s classics? Why would he erase the “after Marius Petipa and Lev Ivanov” from the souvenir program for his version of Swan Lake? Why would he fire his best classical dancer and silent actress? A dancer who according to the NBoC’s 98/99 souvenir yearbook is “recognized as one of the world’s finest interpreters of Petipa.” Kudelka hasn’t given a reasonable explanation, so I’ll take a stab at writing the truth. <P>Glasco believes in Petipa. Kudelka is the anti-Petipa. A duet hopelessly doomed from the very beginning. Marius Petipa, master chef of the Imperial Ballet (1818-1910), excelled in stirring sophistication into classical ballet. He created choreography to serve up the ballerina. Kim Glasco would have been the main dish of his ballet. James Kudelka, the urban peasant of the National Ballet of Canada (1956-), excels in stirring modern movement into classical ballet. He creates choreography to serve up his own choreography. To him, Kimberly Glasco is nothing more than a seasoning for his ballet. To one, the ballerina whirls the ballet; to the other, choreography stirs the ballet. How can it be that Glasco sticks her toes into the dough of Kudelka’s choreography but makes Petipa’s ballet rise?<P>Kudelka’s signature ballets—The Four Seasons and Terra Firma—just happen to be as anti-Petipa as you can possibly get. Kudelka’s dancers dress down: hip, with-it and cool. They sweat! Petipa’s ballerinas dressed up: all a glitter, the rage and très chic. They would never do anything as distasteful as sweat. Petipa’s ballerinas glowed with dew. One was a tutuhorse; the other a smart shopper. Both dressed appropriately for the circles they danced in. Petipa’s ballerinas danced with the upper crust; Kudelka’s dancers danced with common folk. The worlds they danced in could not be more different: one opulent, the other down-to-earth.<P>Dance maker Petipa loved mime. Dance maker Kudelka let his dance do the talking. One prefers four act ballets; for the other, one is enough. Petipa froze time to spice up his dance. He loved to take a photograph of his choreography for the audience. Kudelka keeps his bodies in perpetual motion. For him all those moving bodies thickens his choreography for the audience. One made ballets that would pause for applause. The other made ballets that would wait for their applause. That Petipa, he loved the pas de deux while Kudelka loved the pas de beaucoup. These choreographers could not be more different: one a show-off, the other beauty unadorned.<P>One loved harmony. The other preferred a little disharmony. Petipa’s ballerinas hardly ever intertwined full of passion. Kudeka’s dancers almost always intertwine full of passion. Petipa drew precise classical lines with dynamic pointe work. Kudelka paints modern circles with softer pointe work. For Petipa, balance should endure. For Kudelka, balance is fleeting. They even had different ways of creating. Petipa planned everything in detail at home before going into rehearsal. Kudelka prepares too but prefers to create more so in the studio with the dancer as his inspiration. These choreographers were the flip side of one another. One prefers to have a man dance through The Four Seasons of life. The other would have made a woman for all seasons.<P>Kudelka wants to eliminate the traditional role of the ballerina as the focus of ballet. To him, the silhouette of Kim Glasco clouds his choreography. For Petipa, the ballerina was the focus of ballet. To him, the heart beat of ballet was the ballerina. For Petipa, man was born to support woman. To Kudelka, man, woman, doesn’t matter everybody supports everybody.<P>There is one very important distinction to be made between their creations. Kudelka makes athletic dancers. Petipa made elegant ballerinas. Kudelka’s dancers have to move to many languages. From MacMillan’s Manon to Cranko’s Taming of the Shrew to Kudelka’s (after Marius Petipa and Lev Ivanov) Swan Lake to...well you get the idea. The National Ballet of Canada presents ballets from a veritable smorgasbord of choreographers. It appears Kudelka believes Glasco is incapable of wrapping her toes around a wide variety of choreography. I agree to a pointe but not to the extent of Kudelka. No dancer will excel in every kind of ballet. This past season, the National presented four ballets Glasco absolutely shines in: Cinderella, Onegin, Les Sylphides and Giselle. And Glasco did dance Kudelka’s Nutcracker well enough to earn rave reviews from the critics. According to the write-up in the NBoC’s 98/99 yearbook, Glasco “gives outstanding performances in Tetley’s La Ronde and James Kudelka’s Désir and Cruel World.” If that is true, how can Kudelka call Glasco artistically incompatible? <P>In Kudelka’s mind, Glasco dances not for him but for Petipa. In Kudelka’s mind, Glasco stomps all over his choreography with Petipa’s ballet method. From my view of the stage, it appears Kudelka doesn’t believe he can teach an old ballerina new tricks. I can only surmise he doesn’t care for any dancers who can’t dance the Kudelka way to his liking. Why else would he callously refer to Glasco as “dead wood?” <P>Of course, Mr. K. has proven he can go toe to toe with Petipa. I just don’t believe you can include the Nutcracker and Swan Lake as original Kudelka creations. In the case of the Nutcracker he improved upon it by doing away with Drosselmeyer, adding his bears along with a dancing horse. Twenty years or so from now when ballet historians evaluate his career The Four Seasons and Terra Firma will be identified as the Kudelka style. If he can’t bring out what he wants from Glasco I think he should share some of the blame. There certainly appeared to be enough other ballets to have kept Glasco’s feet busy during the course of this past season. <P>Case en pointe: Cinderella. Three ballerinas all made their debuts as Cindertail: Chan Hon Goh, a pregnant Jennifer Fournier and Xiao Nan Yu. None of whom came close to Kimberly Glasco’s portrayal of Cinderella in 1995. The rather plump Fournier was replaced by stand-in Stacey Shiori Minagawa for the evening performance of May 20th. So basically Kudelka thinks a pregnant dancer and two rookies are better than Kimberly Glasco. Doesn’t make sense, does it? It’s still called the National Ballet of Canada but in reality it is the National Ballet of Kudelka—which is a shame. All this talk of artistically incompatibility is 100% artistic BS. <BR><p>[This message has been edited by Michael Goldbarth (edited June 03, 2000).]

Dance Ballerina Dance!<P>It was with much amusement I read of James Kudelka calling Kimberly Glasco an egotistical publicity hound (The Globe and Mail - Friday, May 19, 2000). If anybody can recognize an egomaniac it is James Kudelka. When asked about Glasco’s brilliant final performances in Manon and La Bayadère, Kudelka responded: “I’d like to remind people that is a credit to me as artistic director that she has looked as good on stage.” So immense is Kudelka’s ego he threatened to resign if forced to recast Glasco! Resigning is nothing new for him. Kudelka already resigned once from the NBoC back in June of 1981 over creative differences with then artistic director Alexander Grant. Kudelka also threatened to resign last year if the National Ballet of Canada did not produce his $2 million Swan Lake. Kudelka even had the temerity to erase the “after Marius Petipa and Lev Ivanov” from the souvenir program for his version of Swan Lake. For Erik Bruhn’s Swan Lake, the National gave proper credit to its original creators. Kudelka’s ego is so immense he actually said he would rather kill himself than cast Kimberly Glasco. Okay, just how large is Kudelka’s ego? He made a Nutcracker so monstrous in size it can only play at the Hummingbird Centre! <P>Ballet companies create their own ballets so they can swap productions. No one’s fighting over Kudelka’s Nutcracker because it comes with a very heavy moving bill: 11 truckloads of sets. The sets are also a pain in the toes for the dancers. Their weight prevents them from dancing on the company’s regular spring floor. The seat pricing for the Nutcracker reflects the size of Kudelka’s ego. The NBoC charges ballet-goers the same price for Front Orchestra, Orchestra Circle and Mezzanine seating. You can’t beat the view from the Front Orchestra. It all makes about as much sense as leading off their 1999 calendar with a fired Kimberly Glasco!<P>Kudelka is the last one who should be critiquing the size of someone else’s ego. For his Swan Lake he claimed: “Every classic needs to be rethought with new logic and powerful archetypes to make it moving and relevant for a new generation.” Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, so what does he do to Swan Lake? Kill off everybody in the ballet! How will the next great dance maker at the National Ballet of Canada revise Swan Lake if all the characters have perished? Tinkering with a classic is lazy ballet making; very much like adding “II” to a classic movie. Now he’s redoing Michel Fokine’s Firebird! How original! When Kudelka makes ballet, he does so for the glory of James Kudelka: NOT his audience. That explains the dark ending to his Swan Lake, his even darker Miraculous Mandarin (a ballet about child abuse) and dark titles like Cruel World. The very dark prince of the NBoC does not like fairy tale endings. <P>From my view of the stage, Kudelka also makes ballet far too much for the glory of his male dancers. Their gangbang of a wench in Swan Lake did nothing to move the story. Swan Lake is the classic black and white escapist ballet. People come to escape inside a dream world made of blowing mist, pristine ballerina and dazzling white tutu. People come to escape inside the beauty of man’s most marvelous creation: the ballerina! Kudelka somehow managed to take the Swan out of Swan Lake even though in his version the Prince actually falls in love with a swan! For his one ballet which deserves to be called a “classic” it is a man who dances through the Four Seasons of life rather than a woman or couple. Kudelka creates choreography to serve up the male and more importantly his choreography—NOT the ballerina.<P>Kimberly Glasco must dance her way out of a Bermuda Triangle filled with broken music. Over and over and over again, Irving Berlin plays “Face the music and dance!” No ballerina has ever danced her way out of this ballet. From Petipa to Balanchine to Kudelka, and every ballet Don in-between, the dance-maker has always enjoyed the role of artistic dictator. Both wives of Marius Petipa benefited from their husband’s artistic patronage. If not for saying “I do” they would most certainly have enjoyed much less prominent positions at the Imperial Ballet. Compared to Balanchine, Petipa was a saint. It was not one of life’s fantastic coincidences that Mr. B. wed five of the most beautiful ballerinas on the planet. His astute eye for dance muses extended to beauty. While fans could only watch the apple of their eyes—George Balanchine had his pick of the New York City Ballet: Alexandra Danilova, Vera Zorina, Maria Tallchief, and Tanaquil LeClercq. His first marriage was in Russia to a sweet sixteen Tamara Geva. Back then the 18 year old Bohemian choreographer went by his real name: Georgi Melitonovitch Balanchivadze.<P>The only ballerina to dare say “NO” to Mr. B. was a lovely nymph who assumed the name of Suzanne Farrell (Roberta Sue Ficker). She was in love with him but only as a friend. Mr. B. made the mistake of playing a 64 year old Don Quixote to her 23 year old Dulcinea. It was not to be; the warning light went on. Such a marriage would be just too weird. Farrell’s wedlock to fellow dancer Paul Mejia was not a smart career move. So sick was Mr. B. of this man who enjoyed the fruits of his careful nurturing—He paid him not to show up for work. Farrell made the mistake of giving Balanchine an ultimatum, and that was it. Balanchine banished them both from the New York City Ballet. After some guesting which included stints for the NBoC, they had to move all the way to Brussels Belgium for steady employment. <P>Many ballet companies were understandably afraid Balanchine might prohibit them from dancing his ballets. George Balanchine may have been the godfather of ballet but that didn’t give him the right to play God. Most of his ballerinas went along with this peculiar arrangement of spouse-muse even though he was far too much in love with making ballet to have a real marriage. His soul mate would always be ballet.<P>When you flash back to the reign of Petipa and Balanchine, Kudelka expelling Glasco is the smallest of indiscretions. It’s no wonder Mr. K. refused to appear on the National Magazine to defend his decision. He’s got 418 years of all omnipotent rule on his side. Of course, having to go toe to toe with a seasoned news veteran like the grizzled Hana Gartner may have had something to do with it! The Cowardly Lion (James Kudelka) hides behind Valerie Wilder (the Tin Woman) whenever the stage gets a little too hot. Given the choice between a National Magazine pas de deux with prima interviewer Hana Gartner and catching the very first overseas flight to Timbuktutu: You’d haul tutu too! The sight of the Cowardly Dandelion breaking out in pimpled raindrops of nervous sweat would have been great fun—in a very sadistic kind of way. A Kudelka \ Gartner pas de deux might even create the rare sight of scalpers outside the Hummingbird Centre! “Tickets...Who’s looking for tickets? Who wants to see the ballet doughboy sweat?” The Taming of Kudelka would sell out in less time than it takes the Cowardly Dandelion to comb his hair. What little mane he has left!<P>The Tin Woman doesn’t sweat. While (Dorothy) Kimberly wept on the National Magazine, Wilder turned Shrew burning holes right through my TV screen! Wilder did what very few have done: Hold her own versus Hana Gartner. Sugar and spice and everything nice do not apply to this former dancer when she’s on a mission. Valerie Wilder scares the wit out of anybody with any sense of self-preservation. During Erik Bruhn’s reign, it was she who handled all the unpleasant tasks—little things like persuading a ballerina to hang up her pointe shoes.<P>The Cowardly Dandelion isn’t a 100% grade A chicken. He didn’t beg Wilder to do his dirty work for him when it came to the firing (non-renewal, whatever you want to call it) of Glasco. Hard to believe but Kudelka actually claims he didn’t fire Glasco; it’s just that he didn’t renew her contract. According to Glasco, she got the pink boot and slip! Let me get this straight: Kimberly Glasco did not appear in the Nutcracker or any of the regularly scheduled subscription ballets over the course of her contract which expired last June; yet, she was not fired. No Swan Lake, no Taming of the Shrew, no Apollo, no Fairy’s Kiss from Kudelka! By not employing her as his muse, Kudelka paid Glasco about $50,000 to sit on her tutu—Money from taxpayers, subscribers, and those who donate to the ballet. You can add another million dollars or so in lawyer fees to that tab in the NBoC’s fight to keep Glasco’s toes off Kudelka’s stage. <P>If anybody can beat 418 years of dictatorship, Kimberly Glasco can. Glasco has already won an arbitrator’s ruling that she be temporarily reinstated and now the ballet is appealing that ruling. Despite more and more empty seats, slashing dates from the subscription season and dancers fleeing to dance elsewhere (Johan Persson, Jaimie Tapper, etc.), and a mounting debt of $4 million: the National’s Board of Directors continues to support James Kudelka. All this boggles the mind when you pause to consider a quote which has appeared ad nauseam in NBoC publications: “James Kudelka is the most imaginative choreographic voice to come out of the past decade.” If James Kudelka could actually live up to that Anna Kisselgoff (dance critic for the New York Times) quote, why are there so many empty seats at the Hummingbird Centre? Could it be because Kudelka has alienated many subscribers by placing ballet making ahead of the talent on stage? <P>Kudelka defending “what the creation of art is” is ludicrous. The way Kudelka makes ballet, his title should be funeral director—Not artistic director! Better for him to embalm corpses rather than force a live audience to sit through another of his dark ballets. Most of the time he either puts the audience to sleep or gives them a headache trying to figure out just what the heck he’s trying to say on stage. Case en pointe: Kudelka’s tribute to Glenn Gould. A Disembodied Voice looked like the pieces of three unrelated puzzles trying to tell a story. That’s what happens when the dance maker (Kudelka), music maker (John Oswald), and set and costume maker (Attila Richard Lukacs) don’t put their heads together. They actually worked independently and expected the whole thing to somehow come together. It was a total mess. Blocking the view of the audience with a piece of the set situated dead centre on stage didn’t help matters.<P>James Kudelka should be charged with trying to destroy a living work of art. That’s what Kimberly Glasco was and still is. Even at the age of 39, Glasco has more than enough juice left to dance as a principal for another two seasons and then as a character artist ‘till she’s 45. For Kudelka to claim he doesn’t like being made into a martyr over the situation is disembodied thinking. He fired the NBoC’s best silent actress and best classical dancer because she didn’t support his Swan Lake and didn’t support him when he ran for artistic director in 1995. <P>As for Kudelka’s claim of Glasco’s “artistic incompatibility,” he is totally full of it! If anybody is artistically incompatible it is James Kudelka. Throughout this entire pas de deux he has behaved like a spoiled child who doesn’t want anybody to play with his ballet company. Dance ballerina dance! Kudelka incompatibility is no reason to face the music. Shine on Kim Glasco! Shine on! Keep dancing towards the light. James Kudelka walks in darkness. Don’t believe me? Have a look for the ballet doughboy next time you’re at the Hummingbird Centre. The moon-faced Kudelka likes to *****foot in and out of his seat under the mask of darkness moments before the beginning and end of his ballet. As for Kudelka ending himself, he’s far too much in love with making dark ballets to do that. <BR><p>[This message has been edited by Michael Goldbarth (edited June 03, 2000).]

As this thread is getting long, we have started a new one at:

http://forum.criticaldance.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=3&t=000062

<font size = -2><center>(Edited by salzberg to fix link)</center></font>

<small>[ 08-11-2002, 16:21: Message edited by: salzberg ]</small>