The ballet world is divided. The discourse prompting the fracture stemmed from a few whistleblowing Instagram posts from Min, the owner and founder of dancewear label Cloud and Victory.
It started with a video inspired by the Ariana Grande dialogue: Should we talk about bodies or not?
Many fans have called attention to the singer’s recent weight loss. Those urging her to seek help possibly feel a sense of social responsibility, while those in the other camp often assume the “don’t comment on people’s bodies” stance.
Using the Grande conflict as a springboard to surface similar issues in the dance world, Min says we should talk about bodies.
You may also like...
Like Neverland, Quarantine Makes You Forget
Being inside a theater made me nervous; quarantine makes you forget and my basic theater etiquette was in a dusty file next to “how to send a fax”.
Going to the Edge
For most dancers, going to the edge artistically means throwing caution to the wind and becoming totally and unapologetically vulnerable.
She called out several dance institutions (citing Vaganova’s height and weight charts, for instance), and reinforced that it isn’t one single organization that is at fault but rather the responsibility of the entire dance community. Where the divisive conversation took off, though, was after Min’s words on the ballet competition Youth America Grand Prix:
“YAGP is asking participants to declare their weight. My personal opinion, this is happening because this incredibly thin ballet aesthetic is still being normalized.”
Cloud and Victory’s Instagram DMs were then flooded with allegations of YAGP enforcing discriminatory practices.
A 13-year-old alleged they were told to lose 10 pounds, another that they “would have placed but she needed to lose 5 pounds.”
Along with weight, there also emerged allegations of score changes to ensure certain dancers would win as well as racist scoring: “she couldn’t take certain dancers to finals because of their race… we have too many of them already”.
Similar to the Grande scenario, there emerged competing opinions: those in support claimed positive experiences with the competition and those criticizing it alleged discrimination. The comments on Cloud & Victory’s posts showcase exactly how each side struggled to understand the other. A few comments reach middle ground and acknowledge the nuance but these are few and far between the bickering.
The focus has mostly been on YAGP despite Min’s initial theory that ballet’s questionable aesthetic standards are merely a catalyst for practices at organizations like YAGP.
While the competition has a responsibility in how they decide to interact with dancers, especially considering their influence on minors, the larger conflict is a symptom of a complicated art form.
Sometimes, it is easier to imagine an institution as great than to accept criticism which might shatter a pre-existing image. What is it that drives this devotion and loyalty? Why is it so difficult to weigh the alternatives?
In ballet, power dynamics are always at play. Unfortunately, the person giving you a “weight talk” is also very likely the same person deciding whether or not your contract is renewed, whether you get a leading role or not, or whether you place in a competition.
With so few opportunities available and a short career, it is no surprise dancers are incentivized to “play the game” and protect tradition:
Yes, I’ll lose 5 lbs to get that role.
Yes, I’ll be an unpaid Trainee for two years.
Yes, this institution is great and I can ignore the red flags.
Cue the “I Hope I Get It” song from A Chorus Line.
And if you don’t or can’t play the game? Well, then you’re passed through a sieve and just hopeful you get through. This is, of course, expected on some level as classical ballet requires elite athletics.
But the practice of weeding out dancers can be used as a cloak for unregulated aesthetic standards.
Which begs the questions: Who decides which aesthetics are desirable and where do we draw the line?
What further reinforces subservience is the obedient nature the art form demands. As a student, you follow the dress code, do exactly as your teacher says, repeat the petit allegro three times. As an adult, the artistic director influences your career and you execute a choreographer’s instruction.
Yes, self-expression matters, but that is frequently within the tight bounds of a contract, a room, a boss.
The unspoken, often collective, agreement in ballet to keep your head down and do what you are told is in itself a paradox.
Rigorous adherence to ballet’s “requirements” helps build exemplary technique and tough skin but often at the expense of autonomy. And if autonomy is underdeveloped, institutional loyalty is easy.
The dancers who advance within that system have an understandable reason to defend it (praise, trophies, jobs, roles). The institution, therefore, keeps producing the same kinds of outcomes. The result is the continued dominance of an ultra-thin, Eurocentric ideal.
Classical ballet will likely be complicated for a long time but fractious cracks in the foundation, while threatening, also open opportunities for reform.
It’s a balancing act.
Something can be great, grande, sublime even, and be deficient at the same time. Without constructive conversation, dancers will be the ones who suffer in the long run. The winners end up being the competitions granting scholarships, the director who might offer you a job, and the long-standing ideals tethering classical ballet.
Featured photo by Kazuo Ota free to use under the Unsplash License.
