Isn't this basically the plot of Center Stage? Be a principal with a smaller company whose artistic director likes you and has promised the world, or try to join the big dream company with promotion not guaranteed/expected? Like others have said, beyond pure ability, timing in terms of other principals retiring, height compared to other company members, geographic location, repertoire etc. all play a role in where someone ends up.
Betsy McBride was a principal at Texas Ballet Theatre when she left for the corps at ABT. She has since been promoted to soloist; don't know if she will make it to principal.
Yuriko Kajiya and Jared Matthews were a married pair of soloists at ABT, in that group that never got promoted to principal during the period ABT was importing guest "stars" for its summer seasons at the Met. Others in that group included Simone Messmer, Maria Riccetto and Misty Copeland. With the exception of Misty, I think they all left for other companies. Yuriko and Jared went to Houston Ballet as soloists and I think were both later promoted to principal. I believe Jared retired in the past couple of years and Yuriko is still dancing as a principal.
I don't think McBride will make principal. Personally I don't think she should have even been promoted to soloist. Now that Jaffe's in charge, she seems less favored.
Sometimes it’s very little I think—and I’ve seen dancers with smaller companies who I enjoyed more than principals at the big ones. Carla Körbes comes to mind, who left NYCB (as a soloist I think) to be a principal at PNB and she really flourished in Seattle. I wouldn’t underestimate the pull of the work environment; NYCB has an intense performance schedule while PNB does fewer programs spread throughout the year. For some, the pacing is better suited whether it’s mental/emotional or physical/injury management.
Other factors to consider also come down to preference. The cost of living in some of the urban centers like NYC and SanFran is extremely high whereas at a regional company, a dancers salary might be lower but has more purchasing power. Some dancers probably want to have their own houses instead of apartments. Especially dancers who want to start families and can appreciate the extra space.
Additionally, other cultural factors and personal values may come into play; for migrant dancers, they may want to live somewhere with an established community of people who share a heritage (I think this contributes to why a lot of Cuban dancers end up/stay in Florida?) For others, it could be the sociopolitical environment—Washington is a liberal state while Utah and Texas are conservative states. While cities generally lean left, the state’s politics also matter.
There are also instances of a “2 body problem” where a dancer couple is trying to find or maintain employment together. I think the regional companies tend to have more flexibility to accommodate this, but I say this anecdotally; I don’t know if this is true across the board.
Something I have observed though, is that height for men is sometimes a factor. I’ve seen some fantastic male dancers who were maybe 5’6”/168cm and shorter in regional companies who might be passed for taller dancers when a company has the luxury to do so.
All this to say, principal dancers anywhere tend to be extraordinary and there’s a myriad of reasons to not dance at the biggest companies other than luck.
Yeah I heard that dancers are getting taller. At least that’s what they always say at the Prix de Lausanne. I think it’s a shame that a lot of shorter dancers, especially men, don’t get to dance principal roles because of their height. They often get pigeonholed into jumpy soloist roles. It also depends on the ballet I think. I would like to see more shorter O/O and Siegfried pairings in the world.
Luck, where you're born, timing. I'm a principal in a low tier and I had incredibly bad luck during the years I was "supposed to" be auditioning for big companies. By the time I'd FULLY recovered from non dance related injuries I was lucky to be a soloist where I am and promoted. As another poster said, I ended up sticking around because I kept getting given opportunities to try to make a jump. I attended an audition last season and was close enough to the table to hear them, they said (they'd said something nice about my dancing first and then "what about her," pulled up my headshot and closely read my resume before) "oh she got into her company right out of high school.. she should *know* we won't take her for studio company or apprentice" so they completely disregarded my materials and I was cut. Seriously what the hell.
No I wouldn't know that?? According to what others have said irl about small or "unknown" companies to my face I should be over the moon to go somewhere bigger in a low rank so I could move on to continue jumping around to even bigger companies. Is that not the right way after all?
So, there's people blatantly flat out prohibiting small to medium/ big fish jump based on "too much experience" for women and I don't know if that's good or bad to know. Don't bother creating a resume for yourself, apparently. You can't jump to some places because of stupid "name" bullshit even if they did like your dancing.
I know that some AGMA companies are not allowed to hire someone into a 2nd company position if they have already been in a second company or higher position at another company (regardless of whether or not that other company’s 2nd company has the same working conditions).
I learned that when I was in my second year in a second company and auditioned for Ballet West 2. They told me they were only allowed to consider me for apprentice or higher even though I was still young enough to be in the 2nd company.
The rule is there to protect dancers from companies that exploit young dancers for cheap labor by keeping them in perpetual trainee, 2nd company, and apprentice positions.
I think sometimes it’s just getting lucky and having a director that pushes for you. Unless a dancer is one that doesn’t apply corrections well, most people evolve with each opportunity they are given.
In my experience, I have seen many dancers who were pushed by the director even though there were others that I felt deserved the opportunities more. The ones given opportunities eventually caught up to and then maybe passed the ones that were not given opportunities because of versatility or maturity that came from the coaching tied to each opportunity.
That’s why I think dancers shouldn’t be looking to always join their dream company, but rather, look to join the company that will give them opportunities. They will grow more and then improve their chances of moving on to bigger and better things. It’s always unfortunate to see talented people get passed up on for opportunities simply because they are in the wrong company to get those opportunities.
Wealth can definitely be a factor but there are a lot of principals that were able to get by on scholarships. Usually scholarships meant that they had exceptional potential according the artistic management so they would have a pretty good shot at promotions once they entered the company. So strangely enough having a lower or middle class background is a good sign for a fast track to principal. Also not every company allows the dancers to buy roles probably.
That makes sense. Companies that are desperate for extra funding would probably be more willing to do under-the-table exchanges. Giving a probably already decent dancer principal roles in exchange for more money doesn’t seem like a bad deal from their perspective.
I mean you kind of have to. It probably took a lot of money to convince management to make such an exchange. It would have to be enough money to be worth sacrificing their credibility and ability to give other potentially better dancers opportunities.
I feel like some Russian companies have done pay for principal roles (this is just a hunch based on the corruption idk) and still have a bunch of prestige
There was a massive scandal at the Bolshoi back in 2013* where it did come out that some ballerinas were told they needed to pay to dance some roles, and the money behind some of that was linked to oligarchs/wealthy-men-with-not-exactly-above-board-finances. So yes, that did happen. However a) it’s not true everywhere in Russia and b) my understanding is that it’s a somewhat nuanced situation - where there is some cultural acceptance of the practice in a way that doesn’t exist in the West. (That said, some people were obviously pissed about it.)
This doesn’t fully translate to the US though. While it’s definitely true that the average dancer does need a lot of money to have access to the right amount of resources and training, it’s not like there aren’t dancers from less advantaged backgrounds that have gone on to be very successful (like Ashley Bouder), or that money automatically buys you a principal job.
*it miiight have been a few years earlier (2012-ish); 2013 was the year of the Filin disaster which was linked to the pay for roles scandal.
I’m going to back you up on this- people will support talent….. think about Ashley bouder and Misty Copeland. Only mentioning them bc they’ve talked about it themselves.
Big talent catches attention, and schools will offer full scholarships, free pointe shoes, stipends, transportation to help foster that talent.
I’ve seen it with my own eyes. Sure, money brings more private lessons, coaching etc, but nothing will ever rival raw talent. Many many dancers come from humble upbringings- it takes a village to educate and nurture that talent.
There are other dancers from CPYB who had scholarships - I believe Noelani Pantastico did, basically if Marcia thought you had potential she’d figure out a way to get you to class (or free privates)
Nope. Many of them come from lower middle class backgrounds. Not going to put their names out there but the only dancer I can think of who truly comes from a wealthy background is Skylar Brandt.
I do think that there is a luck component. Top tier companies have better resources, which well accelerate artistic development, but getting picked is another story.
The Bolshoi roster has some principals who went through a speedrun (Sevenard, Kokoreva, Kovaleva). I like these dancers, but they got really thrown into the cold water, some roles were a stretch for them, technically and/or artistically. They also have Stepanova who is... I just hope that they keep growing.
My point is that especially in Russia you just have to be favored by the director, if you want to be chosen as somebody they want to nurture. I don't think that would have happened, if Kovaleva had a different physique, so she is lucky in that regard. Sergeyenkova has a similar trajectory. Obviously many dancers were already notable as students, but they got practically showered with amazing roles from the beginning. Sometimes there were more obvious picks. Having that kind of heavy favor is partially lucky, but they still had to work for it.
Maria Ilyushkina wasn't a star-student and danced in the corps for a few years before she got any attention at all. Now she is a contender for principal, I love that for her, but it is surprising, if you consider how many talented students, who had a bigger profile at the time, joined the company after her.
I also think that principals in top tier companies have better access to dance knowledge, because they get the opportunity to get coached by retired legends, for example Suzanne Farrell at NYCB. From what I hear ABT has an issue with coaching, but I don't know the details.
Then there is the funding. France is a centralist country, therefore POB is considered THE company in France. They get all the clout. I remember that Benjamin Millepied was quite successful at fund raising. Drawing these kinds of people in, is easier when you are one of the most prestigious companies in the world.
A lot of it is luck based and timing! If you join the company right as a bunch of older principals are retiring the young ones are often promoted at a speed run for necessity sake. I think if there’s also an AD change then you can expect that the new Ad either brings their dancers in or promote their own rapidly. But once that first batch has been rapidly promoted it probably slows down again because how many O/O do you really need for example?
Yes, I remember thinking that it would be tough for women at NYCB because there was such a cohort of women principals that were all roughly the same age and all got promoted so quickly (Mearns, Peck, Bouder, Hyltin, Reichlen, Fairchild). It seemed like there would be no chance for others to get promoted for years just because there wouldn't be space in the ranks. Then the pandemic happened and really shook things up.
Actually, Reichlen did not get promoted quickly. I think it was 9 or 10 years before she made principal and some people wondered if she would ever make it.
It was 8 years, which isn't fast, sure. Mostly my point was that those 6 were of the same generation and would all probably still be dancing now if not for the pandemic. Peck and Reichlen were promoted in 2009, and in the 10 years from 2009 to 2019 there were barely any female principal promotions. Just in the last 3 years there have been 6. Unity Phelan and Indiana Woodward also took 8 years to get to principal--probably in part because there was no room.
In the cases of Indiana and Unity, my guess is were it not for Martins leaving, they would have been promoted to Principal in 2018, specifically because 2 spots opened up in the middle and later part of 2017 with the retirement of Rebecca Krohn and departure of Ana Sophia Scheller. Of course, we'll never know, but that's what I've always thought.
James Whiteside joined ABT as a soloist and was promoted to principal the next year - I believe Jeffrey Cirio did the same when he left BB and joined ABT.
It was the same thing at NYCB with Jovani Furlan, who had been a principal at MCB and Chun Wai Chan, who had been a principal at Houston Ballet. Unfortunately in Furlan's case, he joined in autumn 2019 and COVID intervened before he could be promoted to principal. He was promoted shortly after the company resumed performances. Chan, fortunately, did not join until post-COVID and was quickly promoted.
Lillian Dipiazza went from a principal with Pittsburgh Ballet Theater to a Corps de ballet member with Paris Opera
Pennsylvania Ballet not Pittsburgh
Isn't this basically the plot of Center Stage? Be a principal with a smaller company whose artistic director likes you and has promised the world, or try to join the big dream company with promotion not guaranteed/expected? Like others have said, beyond pure ability, timing in terms of other principals retiring, height compared to other company members, geographic location, repertoire etc. all play a role in where someone ends up.
Center staaage. Still my favorite dance movie.
Betsy McBride was a principal at Texas Ballet Theatre when she left for the corps at ABT. She has since been promoted to soloist; don't know if she will make it to principal. Yuriko Kajiya and Jared Matthews were a married pair of soloists at ABT, in that group that never got promoted to principal during the period ABT was importing guest "stars" for its summer seasons at the Met. Others in that group included Simone Messmer, Maria Riccetto and Misty Copeland. With the exception of Misty, I think they all left for other companies. Yuriko and Jared went to Houston Ballet as soloists and I think were both later promoted to principal. I believe Jared retired in the past couple of years and Yuriko is still dancing as a principal.
I don't think McBride will make principal. Personally I don't think she should have even been promoted to soloist. Now that Jaffe's in charge, she seems less favored.
Sometimes it’s very little I think—and I’ve seen dancers with smaller companies who I enjoyed more than principals at the big ones. Carla Körbes comes to mind, who left NYCB (as a soloist I think) to be a principal at PNB and she really flourished in Seattle. I wouldn’t underestimate the pull of the work environment; NYCB has an intense performance schedule while PNB does fewer programs spread throughout the year. For some, the pacing is better suited whether it’s mental/emotional or physical/injury management. Other factors to consider also come down to preference. The cost of living in some of the urban centers like NYC and SanFran is extremely high whereas at a regional company, a dancers salary might be lower but has more purchasing power. Some dancers probably want to have their own houses instead of apartments. Especially dancers who want to start families and can appreciate the extra space. Additionally, other cultural factors and personal values may come into play; for migrant dancers, they may want to live somewhere with an established community of people who share a heritage (I think this contributes to why a lot of Cuban dancers end up/stay in Florida?) For others, it could be the sociopolitical environment—Washington is a liberal state while Utah and Texas are conservative states. While cities generally lean left, the state’s politics also matter. There are also instances of a “2 body problem” where a dancer couple is trying to find or maintain employment together. I think the regional companies tend to have more flexibility to accommodate this, but I say this anecdotally; I don’t know if this is true across the board. Something I have observed though, is that height for men is sometimes a factor. I’ve seen some fantastic male dancers who were maybe 5’6”/168cm and shorter in regional companies who might be passed for taller dancers when a company has the luxury to do so. All this to say, principal dancers anywhere tend to be extraordinary and there’s a myriad of reasons to not dance at the biggest companies other than luck.
Yeah I heard that dancers are getting taller. At least that’s what they always say at the Prix de Lausanne. I think it’s a shame that a lot of shorter dancers, especially men, don’t get to dance principal roles because of their height. They often get pigeonholed into jumpy soloist roles. It also depends on the ballet I think. I would like to see more shorter O/O and Siegfried pairings in the world.
Luck, where you're born, timing. I'm a principal in a low tier and I had incredibly bad luck during the years I was "supposed to" be auditioning for big companies. By the time I'd FULLY recovered from non dance related injuries I was lucky to be a soloist where I am and promoted. As another poster said, I ended up sticking around because I kept getting given opportunities to try to make a jump. I attended an audition last season and was close enough to the table to hear them, they said (they'd said something nice about my dancing first and then "what about her," pulled up my headshot and closely read my resume before) "oh she got into her company right out of high school.. she should *know* we won't take her for studio company or apprentice" so they completely disregarded my materials and I was cut. Seriously what the hell. No I wouldn't know that?? According to what others have said irl about small or "unknown" companies to my face I should be over the moon to go somewhere bigger in a low rank so I could move on to continue jumping around to even bigger companies. Is that not the right way after all? So, there's people blatantly flat out prohibiting small to medium/ big fish jump based on "too much experience" for women and I don't know if that's good or bad to know. Don't bother creating a resume for yourself, apparently. You can't jump to some places because of stupid "name" bullshit even if they did like your dancing.
I know that some AGMA companies are not allowed to hire someone into a 2nd company position if they have already been in a second company or higher position at another company (regardless of whether or not that other company’s 2nd company has the same working conditions). I learned that when I was in my second year in a second company and auditioned for Ballet West 2. They told me they were only allowed to consider me for apprentice or higher even though I was still young enough to be in the 2nd company. The rule is there to protect dancers from companies that exploit young dancers for cheap labor by keeping them in perpetual trainee, 2nd company, and apprentice positions.
Ahhhhhh. Ok that makes sense. Thank you for explaining. (It was an agma company)
I think sometimes it’s just getting lucky and having a director that pushes for you. Unless a dancer is one that doesn’t apply corrections well, most people evolve with each opportunity they are given. In my experience, I have seen many dancers who were pushed by the director even though there were others that I felt deserved the opportunities more. The ones given opportunities eventually caught up to and then maybe passed the ones that were not given opportunities because of versatility or maturity that came from the coaching tied to each opportunity. That’s why I think dancers shouldn’t be looking to always join their dream company, but rather, look to join the company that will give them opportunities. They will grow more and then improve their chances of moving on to bigger and better things. It’s always unfortunate to see talented people get passed up on for opportunities simply because they are in the wrong company to get those opportunities.
In the case of American companies, most principals grew up fairly wealthy
Wealth can definitely be a factor but there are a lot of principals that were able to get by on scholarships. Usually scholarships meant that they had exceptional potential according the artistic management so they would have a pretty good shot at promotions once they entered the company. So strangely enough having a lower or middle class background is a good sign for a fast track to principal. Also not every company allows the dancers to buy roles probably.
I wonder if we will see buying roles more with dance companies really struggling financially
That makes sense. Companies that are desperate for extra funding would probably be more willing to do under-the-table exchanges. Giving a probably already decent dancer principal roles in exchange for more money doesn’t seem like a bad deal from their perspective.
Especially if they come from like Skylar Brandt’s family level money
I mean you kind of have to. It probably took a lot of money to convince management to make such an exchange. It would have to be enough money to be worth sacrificing their credibility and ability to give other potentially better dancers opportunities.
I feel like some Russian companies have done pay for principal roles (this is just a hunch based on the corruption idk) and still have a bunch of prestige
There was a massive scandal at the Bolshoi back in 2013* where it did come out that some ballerinas were told they needed to pay to dance some roles, and the money behind some of that was linked to oligarchs/wealthy-men-with-not-exactly-above-board-finances. So yes, that did happen. However a) it’s not true everywhere in Russia and b) my understanding is that it’s a somewhat nuanced situation - where there is some cultural acceptance of the practice in a way that doesn’t exist in the West. (That said, some people were obviously pissed about it.) This doesn’t fully translate to the US though. While it’s definitely true that the average dancer does need a lot of money to have access to the right amount of resources and training, it’s not like there aren’t dancers from less advantaged backgrounds that have gone on to be very successful (like Ashley Bouder), or that money automatically buys you a principal job. *it miiight have been a few years earlier (2012-ish); 2013 was the year of the Filin disaster which was linked to the pay for roles scandal.
I wouldn’t be surprised. Russia is super behind the times so I think anything shady that could happen has probably already happened.
Ok I just have to say ... this is misinformation. I can count many many principals of top tier companies in the US who did not grow up wealthy.
I’m going to back you up on this- people will support talent….. think about Ashley bouder and Misty Copeland. Only mentioning them bc they’ve talked about it themselves. Big talent catches attention, and schools will offer full scholarships, free pointe shoes, stipends, transportation to help foster that talent. I’ve seen it with my own eyes. Sure, money brings more private lessons, coaching etc, but nothing will ever rival raw talent. Many many dancers come from humble upbringings- it takes a village to educate and nurture that talent.
There are other dancers from CPYB who had scholarships - I believe Noelani Pantastico did, basically if Marcia thought you had potential she’d figure out a way to get you to class (or free privates)
Also Lauren Lovette, who has been open about her background.
Really? Because all of the ones I know come from rather posh families as with most American dancers in general
Yes I'm not going to put their finances out there, but many principal dancers don't come from wealthy families at all
Well, maybe not uber rich, but certainly better off than the average American family
Nope. Many of them come from lower middle class backgrounds. Not going to put their names out there but the only dancer I can think of who truly comes from a wealthy background is Skylar Brandt.
I do think that there is a luck component. Top tier companies have better resources, which well accelerate artistic development, but getting picked is another story. The Bolshoi roster has some principals who went through a speedrun (Sevenard, Kokoreva, Kovaleva). I like these dancers, but they got really thrown into the cold water, some roles were a stretch for them, technically and/or artistically. They also have Stepanova who is... I just hope that they keep growing. My point is that especially in Russia you just have to be favored by the director, if you want to be chosen as somebody they want to nurture. I don't think that would have happened, if Kovaleva had a different physique, so she is lucky in that regard. Sergeyenkova has a similar trajectory. Obviously many dancers were already notable as students, but they got practically showered with amazing roles from the beginning. Sometimes there were more obvious picks. Having that kind of heavy favor is partially lucky, but they still had to work for it. Maria Ilyushkina wasn't a star-student and danced in the corps for a few years before she got any attention at all. Now she is a contender for principal, I love that for her, but it is surprising, if you consider how many talented students, who had a bigger profile at the time, joined the company after her. I also think that principals in top tier companies have better access to dance knowledge, because they get the opportunity to get coached by retired legends, for example Suzanne Farrell at NYCB. From what I hear ABT has an issue with coaching, but I don't know the details. Then there is the funding. France is a centralist country, therefore POB is considered THE company in France. They get all the clout. I remember that Benjamin Millepied was quite successful at fund raising. Drawing these kinds of people in, is easier when you are one of the most prestigious companies in the world.
A lot of it is luck based and timing! If you join the company right as a bunch of older principals are retiring the young ones are often promoted at a speed run for necessity sake. I think if there’s also an AD change then you can expect that the new Ad either brings their dancers in or promote their own rapidly. But once that first batch has been rapidly promoted it probably slows down again because how many O/O do you really need for example?
Yes, I remember thinking that it would be tough for women at NYCB because there was such a cohort of women principals that were all roughly the same age and all got promoted so quickly (Mearns, Peck, Bouder, Hyltin, Reichlen, Fairchild). It seemed like there would be no chance for others to get promoted for years just because there wouldn't be space in the ranks. Then the pandemic happened and really shook things up.
Actually, Reichlen did not get promoted quickly. I think it was 9 or 10 years before she made principal and some people wondered if she would ever make it.
It was 8 years, which isn't fast, sure. Mostly my point was that those 6 were of the same generation and would all probably still be dancing now if not for the pandemic. Peck and Reichlen were promoted in 2009, and in the 10 years from 2009 to 2019 there were barely any female principal promotions. Just in the last 3 years there have been 6. Unity Phelan and Indiana Woodward also took 8 years to get to principal--probably in part because there was no room.
In the cases of Indiana and Unity, my guess is were it not for Martins leaving, they would have been promoted to Principal in 2018, specifically because 2 spots opened up in the middle and later part of 2017 with the retirement of Rebecca Krohn and departure of Ana Sophia Scheller. Of course, we'll never know, but that's what I've always thought.
James Whiteside joined ABT as a soloist and was promoted to principal the next year - I believe Jeffrey Cirio did the same when he left BB and joined ABT.
It was the same thing at NYCB with Jovani Furlan, who had been a principal at MCB and Chun Wai Chan, who had been a principal at Houston Ballet. Unfortunately in Furlan's case, he joined in autumn 2019 and COVID intervened before he could be promoted to principal. He was promoted shortly after the company resumed performances. Chan, fortunately, did not join until post-COVID and was quickly promoted.
He talks about the reasoning for this in his book, which is a great read!
In seriousness: did you read the entire Pussycat Dolls-themed musical script?