Yukihiko Yoshida on Sun, 1 Jul 2001 08:55:47 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] Martha Graham is still in danger |
Hi list and networks. I had recieved this petition last year. In fact,I wrote japanese webpage for this petition. (The page is in japanese http://www.sfc.keio.ac.jp/~yukihiko/graham.html) But this trouble has not finished yet. At that time,I did not know this list. Then I could not send this to the list. But I send this to the list now. You can see what happens and the processes of trouble in http://www.danceinsider.com/ Martha Graham is one of important dance company in modern dance. If we lost their works and their company, it will be big damage to whole art world.There exists traditon and wisdom from many fields in 20th century. If you can support them,please send any message and support them. Best Wishes from TOKYO Yukihiko YOSHIDA Their websites: http://www.marthagrahamcenter.com Old Page http://www.marthadancers.org NewPage http://www.danceinsider.com/ You can see some infomation and the processes of trouble http://www.danceinsider.com/ ===== the text which released one year ago ======= Dear Friends and Colleagues The future of Martha Graham's body of work, universal in its scope is in grave danger, and faces the very real prospect of extinction. We, the dancers of the Martha Graham Dance Company and many of the dancers who preceded us, believe this tragedy is avoidable and that immediate, concerted action by the international artistic community is essential. Martha's work has been our life - and her Company our livelihood. We now ask for your support in our struggle to revive the Company and to rescue the precious legacy of Martha Graham. For that to happen, we believe certain issues must be understood and candidly addressed. On May 25, 2000 the Board of Trustees of the Martha Graham Center for Contemporary Dance voted to suspend operations of the Martha Graham Dance Company, the Martha Graham School and its Ensemble. Since the death of Martha Graham in 1991 a gulf has grown between The Center whose function it is to perform and teach the Graham works and Mr. Ron Protas who recently established the Martha Graham Trust to administer his rights to the works of Martha Graham. The May 25th decision was a direct consequence of the Board's inability to raise funds because of the intractable, longstanding conflict over artistic issues and finances between the Center and Mr. Protas. This and the failure of Mr. Protas to honor an agreement to step down as artistic director of the Company are at the core of the tragic situation imperiling the survival of the entire Center. Mr. Protas inherited Martha Graham's works and it is apparent to us that his exploitation of this position has alienated presenters, sponsors and members of the philanthropic community thus preventing the Center from receiving the grants and funds necessary to ensure its survival. He also has a history of adversarial, contentious relationships with past and present dancers and staff that has produced a destructive working environment. In addition, he has now announced that he has withdrawn permission for the Martha Graham Dance Company to perform all the ballets she created on the Company ? while at the same time continuing to license those works to other companies. These actions and his egregious behavior have created the untenable situation that undermines the Company and threatens the legacy of Martha Graham. We believe that renewed negotiations between the Trust and the Center to restructure the relationship between them are necessary. Such a restructuring must ensure a respectful, constructive, artistically driven working environment with complete autonomy for the Center and allow invaluable contributions of past and present artists of the Graham Company and School to be respected and utilized. If other companies are to license the ballets from the Trust WITHOUT the Company existing to set the standard for Martha Graham's works, the aesthetic values she devoted her life to will be gravely and forever diminished. Throughout the Company's existence and its many generations of dancers, runs the deep commitment to the Martha Graham technique and theater necessary to the mastery of her work. This continuity and commitment makes the Martha Graham Dance Company the repository of the vast knowledge embodied in her work. It is imperative that the entire dance community, including Mr. Protas, realize that should this Company and School close, the world would be deprived of the home Martha Graham created nearly 75 years ago uniquely dedicated to the creation and continued performance of her work. To preserve the integrity of Martha Graham's work until the Martha Graham Center can be revived, we ask all other dance companies and institutions to refrain from licensing and performing any Graham work. We ask all artists to refrain from participating in the mounting of any Graham work. We ask all dancers to refrain from accepting engagements to perform any Graham work. All of us know the cost of acting on this statement. We do so because our Company and its legacy face extinction. It is our hope that this tragedy wi ll give birth to a new and sustainable future for the Company and School uniquely dedicated to presenting the genius of Martha Graham. We acknowledge that Mr. Protas devoted a significant part of his life to Martha Graham and ask that he honor his commitment to Martha's work by negotiating a new licensing agreement with the Center to ensure the life of the Company and School. Prominent individuals and organizations in the arts and cultural world have come forward to offer their support to the Company in this emergency. The American Guild of Musical Artists, representing 5,000 dance and operatic artists worldwide, the Martha Graham Center's professional staff and the Board of Trustees, support our efforts. We now call upon the international artistic community to stand with us to bring about these changes to preserve some of the most profound dance art created in the modern world. NewYorkTimes/0707/2000 Bitter Standoff Imperils a Cherished Dance Legacy By DOREEN CARVAJAL Things looked bleak for the Martha Graham dance company six weeks ago when it canceled its scheduled performances for the year, suspended operations of its school and acknowledged that it was virtually bankrupt. Now they look even bleaker. The company board has changed the locks on the warehouse where it keeps its costumes and scenery out of fear that its former artistic director would take them. That artistic director, Ron Protas, whom Graham herself chose to carry on her work, operates by cell phone from a location he refuses to reveal and is working to prevent the company from performing any of Graham's dances. Many of the troupe's 17 members have been discussing whether to organize a boycott of the modern dances they have worked so hard to master and perform, to choke off Mr. Protas's ability to license them to other companies. And Mr. Protas is talking of establishing a new company to supplant the one that Martha Graham left him in charge of. The undancerly wrestling match at times takes on aspects of an op駻a bouffe, but for many in the dance world too much is at stake for any laughter. Hanging in the balance, they say, is the legacy of America's great master of modern dance, which, without a school to teach her particular technique or a permanent company to display her oeuvre, could become the stuff of textbooks for dance history courses. "It is an end of an era," said Chrystelle Bond, a dance historian at Goucher College in Maryland. "It's a very sad commentary when people destroy the art in the process of trying to save it. Dance is a living tradition, and once you kill the school, there's a danger that the repertory could be lost in just a few years." The school has 500 students. In her autobiography, published at the end of her long life, Graham left no doubt about whom she would place in control of her choreography, her company and her extraordinary legacy, which spanned most of the 20th century. It would be Mr. Protas, she wrote, the untiring acolyte who for nearly 25 years shadowed her on rehearsals and tours with a yellow legal pad and dark, oversize glasses, scribbling down her dance commentary and absorbing her technique. He was the devoted aide who nursed her back from serious illness and bouts of alcohol-induced isolation and depression, enabling her to create and produce more dances when the prospects for this seemed dim. It was this man, she wrote, to whom she "entrusted the future of the compan Now, nearly 10 years later, the Martha Graham Center of Contemporary Dance, encompassing the Graham dance company, school and junior troupe, is struggling to survive the internecine warfare. Mr. Protas, who was ousted as artistic director and as a board member, still owns the rights to Graham's works and controls the Martha Graham Trust, which licenses the Graham dances. both to the center and to others. All of this puts Mr. Protasat the center of the storm. His scornful critics say that his mercurial personality makes him the most reviled man in dance. That is a tough label for a person with the charm to joke that he doesn't dance a step except for the merengue he mastered decades ago at a Fred Astaire school. "I'm not a saint, but they seem to blame everything but the Crucifixion on me," he observed dryly. At 59 he is zealous and sometimes prickly in seeking to guard Graham's image and the more than 180 dances that established her as a revolutionary modern dancer and choreographer. Graham, who died at 96 in 1991, started what is now the nation's oldest dance company in 1926 and created stark dances and highly dramatic ones that used her movement vocabulary, the Graham technique. Mr. Protas, a restless man with tight tousled curls and a voice that dips into a slow whisper to punctuate points, took over full control as artistic director of the company after Graham's death. That meant he made critical decisions about casting, selection of the season's ballets and appointment of the rehearsal directors who coach dancers. The company long had an international artistic reputation, but it also had a checkered financial history and a touring schedule that was declining in the last years of Graham's life. The son of a New York businessman and a housewife with a passion for theater, Mr. Protas met Graham in the late 60's when he was a freelance photographer and was intermittently attending law school, which he never finished. The relationship, he said, grew as he tended her while she was hospitalized in her 70's for diverticulitis. It was a dark period in her life when, she wrote, she stopped dancing and started brooding alone, drinking too much and eating too little. Today even Mr. Protas's fiercest critics give him credit for helping to revive Graham's interest in her career. But Mr. Protas said he knew that company members mocked the relationship by calling him and Graham the Harold and Maude of dance. "Her act of choosing me created jealousy and animosity because all the other dancers felt that they should have been chosen by her, and that is a big part of it," Mr. Protas said. His opponents portray the dispute in other ways. "Ron thinks that because Martha was treated as an icon that he would get the same treatment as her heir," said Judith G. Schlosser, a Graham Center board member for more than 20 years. "It took us several years to figure out how to pass on the torch." She said that the board's goal was to make the company more businesslike to appeal to previously reluctant donors. Encoded in the word "businesslike" is a sharp critique, by Ms. Schlosser and many others, of Mr. Protas's perceived way of doing business and dealing with dancers. He has alienated some potential contributors and theater presenters, who complain that in his zealousness to preserve the Graham legacy he became erratic and difficult and constantly sought to renegotiate matters that had already been decided. "I cannot work with Ron Protas again," said Ken Fischer, president of the University Musical Society at the University of Michigan, which organized a Martha Graham festival in 1994. "I have another major project that I want to do with a Martha Graham dance in 2001. I've got the space reserved and the support identified. But I don't feel I can do it if I have to work with Ron. It's just too much dealing with him. He's always changing his mind." Mr. Protas has also faced an undercurrent of derision because he does not dance himself. Critics say that resentment increased because of his brusque treatment of dancers, who were frequently reduced to tears by his critiques. "How can he be coaching about movement if he has never done it?" said Camille Brown, who quit the company in 1994. "It's like talking about the ocean if you have never seen it." Ms. Brown quit the company soon after filing a complaint with the American Guild of Musical Artists, the dancers' union, in connection with a rehearsal incident involving Mr. Protas. She did not pursue the complaint after the filing. She said she was preparing for a role when Mr. Protas tied her hands loosely with rope because, he told her, the piece was about being bound and trapped. And, she said, he added that he would be back with duct tape. "It was so humiliating," Ms. Brown said. "And there was no one in the building who would say, 'You can't do these things.' " Mr. Protas said that this rehearsal method was used by Graham herself for the piece, "Errand Into the Maze," as a way to connect with the experience of being restrained, which he said he told Ms. Brown. Critics say as many as 30 dancers, administrators and support staff have left over the years because of Mr. Protas's management style. Mr. Protas maintains that turnover is natural in any arts organization and that it had been heightened by the company's financial turmoil. Those who have left include a former managing director, Todd Dellinger. He left this year and broke into choking sobs recently when he recalled a "sick environment" in which "a bunch of addictive, high-strung personalities were living in a very dysfunctional office." At the top of the heap, he said, was Mr. Protas. By all accounts, the strains between Mr. Protas and the board created warring camps and an atmosphere of deep suspicion, with differing accounts about who was responsible for the growing budgetary problems. Mr. Protas maintained that in the last two years he had disengaged himself from the administrative management of the company to concentrate on artistic matters. "They kept saying if you would just go away, everything will be fine," he said. "And I turn over management to them, and look what happens." But Mr. Dellinger said that Mr. Protas had a hand in major transactions and decisions as small as selecting the company's postcards. The feuding ranges beyond the deficit that brought the suspension of operations in May, to issues as serious as Mr. Protas's maneuvers to replace the board's chairman and as small as his irritation with a consultant's penchant for open-toed sandals and napping on the office floor. ("He was a very good organizer and helped the board like never before," Francis Mason, the acting chairman, said of the consultant. But, he conceded, "Maybe he was sleeping under the desk.") In the end, the board feared that donations would dry up if Mr. Protas continued in any management role. The Harkness Foundation for Dance had already withdrawn its support. And so, last month, with the school and company shut down, another crucial showdown was set over what is perhaps Mr. Protas's most powerful hold on the Gr The board tried to negotiate a new agreement that would allow the company to perform the dances for 10 years with minimal involvement from Mr. Protas in return for an annual fee about equal to his $100,000 salary as artistic director. But when his lawyer insisted that Mr. Protas keep some form of artistic control, the trustees countered with his removal from the board. After that vote, four of Mr. Protas's supporters on the board resigned. "I don't know why they make Ron the b黎e noire, the scapegoat. I have no idea," said one of them, Princess Moune Souvanna Phouma of Laos. She added that at every meeting she attended it appeared the board was more intent on destroying Mr. Protas than on confronting its own financial shortcomings. Some Graham dancers and teachers appealed to Mr. Protas to renegotiate despite the turmoil. When they got no response, they said, the dancers began to discuss the plan to boycott Graham's dances by other companies as long as they were licensed through Mr. Protas. New battles may be brewing. No one is quite sure what will happen to the Joffrey Ballet's plans to rent costumes for a scheduled performance of Graham's "Appalachian Spring" in October. Mr. Protas said the costumes were his to rent, but the Martha Graham Center pays for storage in a warehouse that it has outfitted with new locks. Mr. Protas does not have the keys. In the meantime the company does not have enough money to move into its planned quarters in the vast basement of a new building rising on East 63rd Street on the former site of the company's school, which was sold to reduce debt. The center began trying to organize classes at an alternative studio after plans for classes at the 92nd Street Y fell through for lack of money. "You can't open a school without a dollar for teachers or the accompanist," said Pearl Lang, a former company dancer and noted choreographer. "It just makes me sick. If I work with one group, it seems as if I'm at war with the other." From his office, Mr. Protas holds out the possibility that he might open a new school. For those who have watched the warfare and sometimes been caught up in it, there is nothing less at stake than a language of dance. Janet Eilber, whom the company hopes -- money permitting -- to name as Mr. Protas's successor, contends that the mess has to be fixed before the Graham technique becomes a memory. "Martha could be consigned to a history class in 10 years unless there are new talent and new disciples," she said. "It will happen incredibly fast. In fact, it's already been happening." _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold