L.A. Ballet: Dancer Turnover

Thank you very much, "Liscarkat." Actually I have written a book, but it's mostly about my time with Balanchine and the glory years with his New York City Ballet. I do have a chapter on what happened in LA with our company, and there is an article due out soon in C Magazine in which I was interviewed and spoke at length about the whole original Los Angeles Ballet history. Not sure how much will actually get in there, but at least I tell the truth about the abysmal political games being played at that time. Don't forget that Ronnie Reagan Jr. was then dancing with the Joffrey Ballet, and funny enough they became the "resident" company of the Music Center, mostly because of a $2M dollar grant to the Music Center from a prominent Republican backer. Hmmm. Too many skeletons to go into here, but maybe the C Magazine article will print what I told them....maybe not.

I was an apprentice corps de ballet dancer in the original LAB in the mid and late 1970s, and as John Clifford said in his comment, there was indeed a family feeling there and a great many performance opportunities. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I always saw Clifford as a very positive figure who radiated creativity and energy. He knew everyone, down to the lowliest corps member (me, for example) and was constantly supportive and encouraging. For those who worked hard, there were always opportunities to dance. It seemed to pay off in loyalty for, as he says, there were quite a number of early company members who were there to the end. What ballet in L.A. needs is someone like John Clifford, or better yet, Clifford himself.

Writers have to earn a living, too... Who can blame Ms. Bleiberg for pandering to the lowest common denominator?? bitter and disgruntled scribes - like the bitter, wacky, and miserable 'stars' of a truly mind-boggling bunch of Reality Shows on the idiot box - make compelling entertainment for a certain audience. Barnum said it best - it's impossible to underestimate the appetite of this voracious segment of coprophages...

I just paid $24,31 for an iPad2-64GB and my girlfriend loves her Panasonic GF 1 Camera that we got for $34,26 there arriving tomorrow by UPS. I will never pay such expensive retail prices in stores again. Especially when I also sold a 42 inch LED TV to my boss for $678 which only cost me $68,18 to buy. Here is the website we use to get it all from, CentSpace.com

I just paíd $20.87 for an íPad 2.64GB and my boyfriend loves his Panasoníc Lumíx GF 1 Cámera that we got for $38.79 there arriving tomorrow by UP S.I will never pay such expensive retail príces in stores again. Especially when I also sold a 40 inch LCD T V to my boss for $657 which only cost me $62.81 to buy.Here is the website we use to get it all from : http://BidsBit.com

As the managing and artistic director of Luminario Ballet, a 3 year old contemporary ballet and aerial dance company, I feel that the growth of all the dance companies here benefit by having LAB here and that all of us compliment each other. The public definitely needs to support our companies and the dancers need support, too.

Ballet is changing- the old ways of terrorizing the dancers is on its way out, but at the same time most ballet companies are not cooperatives, but run rather like an army with officers in charge, and everyone marching in the same direction- conformity to technique skills is what makes it possible for artistic expression to happen.

What is also important for LA dance supporters to realize is that as long as an average company can only employ their dancers for a portion of the year, the company is always at risk of losing dancers to elsewhere.

So, I am asking the LA audience to get busy and get behind your favorite companies and help them get a longer paid season, a better paid season, and maybe we too can join the national dance conversation where dancers can begin their careers with us here and stay til they retire, too!

Eek, not only are the dancers paid pennies compared to their peers at other smaller companies, but no health insurance? If I were a young, pro dancer without insurance, I'd dance with a deer-in-the-headlights look all the time, too.

The problem with LAB is that Neary and Christensen do not have the ability to work with other people. They do not take suggestions and they push people aside who could be extremely helpful. It gets them nowhere.

The dancer turnover is the least of LAB's problems.They have founded their company on a tired concept of francised Balanchine and classical ballets, all of which, thus far, have been seriously diminished for the lack of real music. This makes the appearance of the company seem more like a local ballet school or a semi professional production albeit with better quality dancers and direction. But this is not enough to lift LAB into the realm of a ballet company associated with a huge metropolitan area like Los Angeles. They have from the beginning decided to dispense with the music and it has been a huge error. This is simply part of being a real ballet company. Unfortunately it is a trend with other mid size touring companies too, a kind of default paradigm for the economically stressed era in which we live. At this point I would rather not see another company in this mold than continue to support the down grading of concert dance. If they are performing to music specifically designed as sound tracks fine, but not classical dance dumbed down to suit a price tag.

I agree with Mr. Clifford that the Music Center could go a long way to putting LAB on the map.Perhaps supporting them at the Music Center with a committment to a yearly story ballet with orchestra would be one option. Ultimately that would be more productive for the city than importing ballet from around the globe at great expense and then having a largely false dialogue about why ballet is such a tough sell in Los Angeles. The reasoning is it seems as follows: LAB is not good enough so we'll pay other companies to come thus making sure that LAB doesn't have a chance to develop and then continue to complain and wonder why they can't seem to improve. Unfortunely there have been some very dull moments on the Kaufman series in the last two seasons along with some very under attended concerts so the foreign import model also seems to have its problems.

The size of LAB's funding is probably not going to solve the problems with real music. The question is, how long can they inhabit the current model without moving on before their audiences tire of live dance and canned sound? I have seen all the LAB seasons thus far. They have created some new programming with NEW WAVE and guest choreographers but I think this is a departure from the kind of company they ultimately want to be.

I also saw this year and excellent performance of State Street Ballet doing Appalachaian Spring with choreography by William Soleau. They had partnered with the Santa Barbara Symphony which played a version of the orchestral suite for the performances. State Street deals with many of the same problems as LAB ( they may even be a smaller company as far as funding goes) but they managed to to do a pretty impressive thing and it elevated them as a company and certainly elevated the audience experience with having a traditional arrangement of concert dance and live music. Other models exist for getting it done. For now, it looks like it's going to be more business as usual from LAB and the ballet scene in Los Angeles but I do wish then all the luck in the world.

All of the things written in the article are nothing new as far as how ballet dancers are treated all over this country. Beautiful legs and feet...(especially with girls) are a dime a dozen. Dancers frequently do not get their contracts renewed without explanation. This happened to me and I was in larger companies. There are many other dancers waiting in the wings to take your position. Dancers put up with this treatment because their love of the art comes first. This is nothing new people. Talk to any real ballerina, and they will tell you they've heard this story and experienced it more times than they'd like to admit. On that note however,...I saw 2 programs of L.A. Ballet last season and was very impressed. I will continue to support the ballet, as it is close to my heart. Keep plugging along, and hopefully all the ballet fans and people who love art in general will keep the company afloat. Nice to see John Clifford's response. I did his Nutcracker out here when I was just a little girl.

After reading the article and the comments posted below, I have to wonder how old the following "current LAB dancer" is and if she/he has danced with any other companies? Judging from the article, most of the dancers in the company are straight out of their respective ballet school's telling me there is a bit of young, naivety there. Dancers don't leave a job unless things are really not working for them... especially in these rough economic times. I have heard many unfavorable things about this duo that is leading this company.

As a current dancer with Los Angeles Ballet I have to say that Colleen and Thordal are definitely the people to direct a ballet company in Los Angeles. Do I think they are perfrect or agree with all of their decisions?..No I do not, but I still fully believe in their abilities as directors. One thing that both of them have (and I feel especially Colleen) is passion for their dream to make a ballet company in Los Angeles succeed. I find the personal insults posted against Colleen to be malicious and hurtful. Any mistakes that she has made are only the result of the extreme pressure that she is under. I find that most people in the company really love and respect Colleen. She is a positive and supportive force; when we finished our first performance of Balanchine's Raymonda this season she was in tears because of how proud and happy she was. They both expect a lot from the dancers, but would we wish it otherwise? I think not.

Readers also need to remember that a ballet company is an artistic endeavor, where the directors have the right to make the artistic decisions that they choose. In every ballet company directors make choices that not everyone agrees with. The difference between this company and others is the financial situation. The only way to really remedy the high turnover is for there to be more support for the company. It saddens me that this article was written; because it is only going to hurt the dancers by disouraging support. I believe when the directors have financial confidence there will be a more relaxed artistic approach, which will show itself in the dancers' performances. Colleen, Thordal and the dancers have achieved so much in five seasons, I can't wait to see what will be done in the next five.

it amazes me that people without direction skills like Neary and Thordal are in charge of LAB, LAB deserves better directors. How long is going to take for the supporters to realize it? LAB is hopelessly going downhill and it is not fair for the dancers or the public. I am appalled that Ms. Neary doesn't come to terms with reality. The dancers are unhappy and leaving even in the middle of the season. Should Ms. Neary and Thordal be accountable for the unhappiness and turnover? Let us be honest and get to the point, LAB needs new direction before the doors are closed!

I am really happy that so many people are talking about this story and the long history of ballet in Los Angeles. Thank you for your comments.

I wanted to add a few points. First, I want to mention what inspired this article. I have seen nearly every one of LAB’s programs. I have gotten to “know” the dancers from carefully watching them perform. After a few seasons, I noticed that some of the soloists started leaving for jobs with more established companies. That was disappointing, but not unexpected. But at last spring’s performance of "Giselle," I realized there were many fewer dancers whom I recognized. I was curious – how many dancers have come and gone in five years? I have saved all my programs and analyzed the turnover season by season. To make sure I was being accurate, I double-checked my records with the company. This story began with numbers, not gossip.

A dance company cannot become cohesive and outstanding, or develop its own distinctive style, if it does not have a consistent group of men and women whom it trains and rehearses for as many weeks as possible. That, in turn, is what will help to attract an audience. Yes, we all go to the ballet to see particular repertory. But it’s the dancers who bring the ballets to life. Being able to watch the artists of your “own” company as they mature, stretch and entertain you throughout a season, is what distinguishes a local company from a touring troupe. It is something special.

Finally, as to whether this story is “news”: This high rate of turnover is exceptional and undesirable. It is having artistic ramifications at an institution that people care about. That most definitely makes it news.

If LAB dancers didn't have the financail support from their parents.......there wouldn't be a company! Short contracts, sub par pay with little chance of these dancers getting p/t work else where due to the economic climate make it a stuggle for many of these dancers. LAB's managing of this company is weak. They cannot think "outside the box" Promoting 2 dancers as principles while leaving the rest with no rankings at all. Read the reviews......where these 2 dancers worthy of such a promotion? I think not.

There were similar complaints when Christensen and Neary were in charge of the Royal Danish Ballet....which was for a very brief time, for good reason. It amazes me that they were hired in L.A. at all.

Its interesting that this article has caused a competition between John Clifford and the current Los Angeles Ballet. The two companies may share a name and a city, but that's where the similarities end. The most obvious and significant difference being that the current Los Angeles Ballet is still alive and growing.

Love this dialog between all of you. Wish we had the internet during the ten years of the original Los Angeles Ballet (1974 - 1985) That company kept the majority of its dancers, and had dancers regularly enter the professional company from its affiliate school, (Damian Woetzel is one who later became a star of the NYC Ballet after LAB disbanded due to pressure from the Music Center, also Ellen Bauer, who later went to the National Ballet of Canada, to name but two). We also had seasoned soloists that joined us from the NYC Ballet, The Stuttgart Ballet, and other major ensembles; that came to stay, not just as guest artists. I could go on, but that was another day...much tougher than today. In those years Dorothy Chandler (founder of the LA Music Center) regularly told our patrons to drop us and ONLY support "her" Los Angeles Philharmonic. We also had to deal with the acid tongued critic, Martin Bernheimer, famous for his vitriolic reviews of Zubin Mehta...and us. He called us his, "favorite victims." Los Angeles is a much more supportive place these days than ever before, and this LAB has it relatively easy.. John Clifford

I am deeply disappointed that Ms. Bleiberg felt the need to write such a negative article about a company that is obviously working very hard to stay above water in such an unsupportive city. Every ballet company has its flaws. If the directors ARE less than nurturing to their dancers, well, frankly, that's hardly news. There are many ballet companies with directors who behave in much more disgusting ways. It also seems completely illogical to write an article that criticizes how little the dancers are paid, when this article can only make people LESS likely to donate to and support Los Angeles Ballet. How is this helpful to the dancers? They will not get more weeks of work OR higher salaries if you discourage people from attending performances. Meanwhile, this is hardly encouraging for the dancers themselves. How do you expect them to feel when they read this article, during the summer, when they have not even begun the season? This article seems to be a very irresponsible action by someone who should be promoting ballet in Los Angeles, not beating it down.

This young company is attempting to do something for the city, and is non-profit where staff, leadership AND dancers are all surviving on meager salaries. If this company is to succeed, its Board must step up and build the business end of the company so that the all the artists involved can create and work in a supported environment. Reviews are good, performances are solid. It is a shame to hear this negative "behind the scenes' reporting. Is this news? Perhaps Ms. Bleiberg needs to look deeper into the company workings to learn why tensions are high.

Well into my professional career, I turned down offers with several established companies to become a founding member of LAB in 2006. Several empty promises and multiple injuries later (partially due to their unsprung floor), I left and decided to finish my undergraduate degree and begin my teaching career. I still remember the tremendous anxiety of being injured with a company during their first and very tense season. Adding insult to injury, I was basically discarded by the directors and blamed for my broken condition. They took me off the pay roll until I recovered (which I still have not done), hired some eighteen year-old student the next day, and demanded that I watch every rehearsal without pay. Unlike most of their dancers, Mommy and Daddy were not subsidizing my "fabulous" ballerina lifestyle. I still have nightmares.

Colleen and Thordal really need to learn that, like all other regional companies, your strength comes from your older, more experienced dancers that may not be as a promising as an 18 year old... Dancers that are seasoned performers and are, most importantly --professional--. Instead of spending money getting all these guests artists with big names who see it as another guesting, and trying to fill in big ballets with basically students, they need to use their money more wisely by putting it into people who are strong and capable. And be willing to throw away the Balanchine tradition of the ballet company first. Los Angeles is a place for names and celebrity. They have little loyalty to their dancers. You've got to get a good principal dancer and promote them as such. I danced in several companies and in LAB. Colleen is a wonderful stager, but it doesn't matter if you have no talent to stage things on. Also, Colleen and Thordal need to recognize that they have gotten a lot of talented dancers who gave up precious contracts elsewhere only to be treated like apprentices or less. When you work up to a soloist or principal position, and you leave for another company.... that company has an obligation to your artistry to keep you employed as a decent dancer as long as your dancing to the same level you auditioned at. It's morally wrong to hire soloists and people from top tier companies and fire them by email.... not even NYCB or ABT would do that.

I feel for this new company but must agree that if you don't have long contracts to offer, and decent salaries, you MUST foster a feeling of a family dynamic with the dancers. I gather this is not the case with this new Los Angeles Ballet. When I founded and ran my, "Los Angeles Ballet" (1974-1985) I and my board of directors did everything in our power to make the dancers feel appreciated and supported. Number one was to give them many more performing opportunities than this new group. Our company averaged over 100 performances locally, and we did 5 national US tours. We also danced with the NY Philharmonic, and LA Philharmonic on more than one occasion, including performances at the Hollywood Bowl. And, this was all within our first 3 years! These prestigious performances and tours, (twice to New York City) made our dancers feel they were part of a growing concern. Several stayed with the company for its whole 10 years of existence. Reid Olson, Johnna Kirkland, Nancy Davis, Colette Jeschke, Lesli Weisner, Charles Flemmer, and many others were there from day one. Others started with us, like Damian Woetzel, (who only left when our company was disbanded by the board due to pressure from the Music Center) Victor Barbee, Darci Kistler, and then went on to stellar careers with the New York City Ballet and American Ballet Theater. They all came back as guest artists, and did our community proud. It doesn't look too promising for this new company until they can build a, "family," and keep their dancers. John Clifford

Neary and Christensen have failed Los Angeles, not the other way around. LAB's problem is management.

My only close up experience was ten years ago when Ms. Neary was to substitute for a vacationing teacher, Just as class was about to begin she ran into the room, on the verge of tears and yelled that people were hurtful in not being happy she was the subsitute , she then ran out in tears, and finally returned sometime later to complete the class. She is very volatile, nervous, and exceedingly defensive. Her husband only comtributes to this with his own brand of grandiosity. Not going far with this at the head of your company.

It seems to me that LAB would benefit from a joint operating agreement with another company that offers a part time contract, and share dancers. LAB could stage 3 performances (excluding Nutcracker), and those could be repeated in another location (such as Portland's OBT). The other company's productions could be repeated at LAB. Each company could offer a 26 week contract. Both companies would have lower expenses, and therefore be able to offer higher pay scale and health benefits to dancers.

All that said, the "unease" look onstage is worrisome. Both Christensen and Neary danced at Pacific Northwest Ballet in Seattle when the directors had a reputation for nurturing and a family atmosphere. I am sad they have not been able to replicate that culture at LAB.

Terminating anyone via email is just poor professionalism, I don't care who you are, or what your dance resume was.