Do not take Willy Burmann's Steps class.
Wombat52
Willy Burmann, teaching ballet at Steps Studio in NYC, is capable of
abusing, in an old-fashioned, now discredited manner, mature students who
have been working with him for years and who certainly know what they are
doing. He seems to forget that these people are buying a service from him
and can easily take their business elsewhere. He recently was
unconscionably rude and abusive to a loyal longtime student who had done
absolutely nothing to incur his wrath. And this is only one of several such
incidents. That student quietly left the class and will neither study with
nor speak to him again.
We are not talking about some of the eccentrics who have been taking class
for years, do not improve, and seem to be in their own little dream worlds,
but about people with a certain level of accomplishment who also know how
to behave in class. Burmann is also abusive to several of the pianists,
which is ridiculous since he appears to know next to nothing about music
himself. There are other good teachers at Steps; patronize them instead. Or
go to another studio. Regrettably, there are a lot fewer dance studios than
there used to be. But don't give Burmann your business.
Philip Rosemond
Wombat52:
I cannot speak for how Willy is teaching now,
but I loved his classes when I was dancing professionally.
When I was with the original Washington ballet, he was
ballet master for a year and well respected. I learned how
to dance Balanchine without injuring myself, from Willy.
I'm curious. Has Willy developed a "mean streak"? I'm
skeptical of this. He has trained some of the best. Indeed,
he has a unique style to his class choreography. His humor
is cutting and dry; but I have never known him to be cruel.
All those AABers out there who know Willy's classes, please
respond, as I have been out of the loop for a while.
Thankyou, yours, Philip S. Rosemond.
GEHors
This summer, my daughter was in NYC for a summer intensive. While there,
she managed to fit in some classes at Steps with Willie Burmann. She said
then, and still says, that they are the best classes she has ever had with
any teacher. My daughter is quiet and shy and had no trouble with Mr.
Burmann whatsoever. He gave her wonderful corrections which she has taken
to heart and these were not done with any malice whatsoever. Mr. Burmann
is a world class teacher and appears to be respected by most and
appreciated by many. His classes are always filled with the best of the
best on any given day and I believe he in turn gives the best of himself.
My daughter will never forget him and is anxious to return to NYC for more
of his classes.
Jooss
My 2 cents worth regarding Willy Burmann's classes. I've known Willy for
ove 30 years and regard him as one of the finest teachers in NYC. Alas, he
does stick to the "old school" attitude, but minus the cane used my such
teachers as Madame Pereyslavic, Igor Swetzoff, etal. [excuse spellings]
I would venture a guess that today's students are not interested in being
taught by anyone who demands their utmost in class - again as the tiny
terror who made great dancers - Madame Bronislova.
Willy is a hard taskmaster and I really don't think you can reach your
personal best as a dancer without working with teachers of this ilk. It is
physically, mentally and emotionally tough to become a professional dancer,
especially if you aspire to become an artist of the highest interity. Glad
to hear Willy is still teaching the way we were trained. Lili Cockerille
Livingston
Wombat52
It is one thing to teach strictly and well, which Burmann does. It is
quite another thing to insult publicly a highly intelligent, capable
longtime student who did absolutely nothing to cause his outburst. He
attempted to humiliate this student for some twisted reason only he knows,
and there are numerous witnesses to the incident. His behavior is
absolutely unpardonable under any circumstances.
This can never be defended as "good teaching." It had nothing whatsoever
to do with good teaching. Do not defend Burmann's behavior on the grounds
that you can make good dancers by publicly humiliating them. It just shows
what a poor judge he is of the class and intelligence of some of those he
chooses to attack. He isn't fit to wipe this person's shoes.
becca
X-18217-Poster: becca <be...@aros.net>
At 07:52 PM 9/15/97 GMT, you wrote:
>X-18215-Poster: womb...@aol.com (Wombat52)
I have not taken Willy Burmann's classes, but if he is "old school" then
personality assassination is part of the whole package.
I think it is wrong. No matter how good a teacher is, there is NO reason
for this type of thing to go on in a class.
I think of a number of teacher's I had as a student who were this type, and
I know I will never teach in this manner.
I find it abusive, and downright horrible. It causes insecurities, and
personal conflicts where there should not be any of these things.
If there is a reason for this type of behavior. (ie, someone acting out in
class, not paying attention, etc.) then a firm hand, yelling etc can be
justified. But rudeness for the sake of intimidation is a bunch of c...p.
I have lived it and wouldn't want to put anyone through it.
Although, I do have to agree with Jooss, that as a professional, there are
many times this may occur. This is true mainly with the older AD's, who
were trained this way, and still train this way. The younger teachers and
AD's have decided it is lousy to do this and most have given it up. I can
not justify mr. Burmann's behavior, nor any AD's. But it is true, it
happens and one must grim...(yes M ) and bear it. It is horrible.!!
Bek
Leigh Witchel
A very sensible response, Becca. My only exception is that one does not
always have to "grim and bear it" (I did that, too. A three year sentence
with Gabriella Darvash.) If teachers are abusive, go somewhere else.
They may be the best teachers in the world, you still won't learn as well
from them.
Of course it is essential to be disciplined, almost monastically so, to
learn ballet. That does not come from screaming, insults or abuse. It
comes from high, insistent expectations. There is a difference between a
demanding teacher (or director) and an abusive one. And the latter is
unacceptable behavior, and there aren't excuses for it. To think there
are is basically assuming "I suffered for my art, now it's your turn."
And that just perpetuates the cycle.
LAW
In article
<3.0.32.19970915...@mail.aros.net>,
--
Leigh Witchel - d...@panix.com http://members.aol.com/lwitchel
Dnczrna
womb...@aol.com (Wombat52) wrote:
>It is one thing to teach strictly and well, which Burmann does. >It is
quite another thing to insult publicly a highly intelligent, >capable
longtime student who did absolutely nothing to cause >his outburst.
Well, Mr. or Ms. Wombat, I do not quite see where -you- fit into
all this...I mean, you are claiming that this occured between Mr. Burmann
and "SOMEONE ELSE". What business is it of yours, pray tell?
Did "Someone Else" specifically request that you go about besmirching Mr.
Burmann's name? It would seem to me that this is a PRIVATE matter between
"Someone Else" and this teacher.
If, indeed, the incident you witnessed incensed you enough to want to tell
everyone in Cyberspace, why are you hiding behind a screen name. You were
only to happy to name Mr. Burmann specifically, but too cowardly to name
thyself or "Someone Else".
Now, why don't you and "Someone Else" be reasonable about this, and seek
to find out why Mr. Burmann took the action that he did. From what so many
others have attested, he is not an unreasonable man, besides being a
well-respected teacher.
Perhaps he was having a horrendous day. Who knows? In any case, if you or
"Someone Else" did not attempt to even find out why, what right do you have
to air this unfinished business. There are at least two sides to -every-
story, and this one is blatantly one-sided, at this point!
How about you and "Someone Else" getting off your high horse, quit making
like the "National Enquirer", and bring this matter to resolution in a
reasonable manner? Why not consider bringing the matter to an official
Arbitrator/Mediator, if you really think it is so important?
It is what any decent, moral and right-minded individual would do, rather
hiding behind a phony identity and slinging mud.
Hmmmph!
~D~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Dnc...@aol.com is for anti-spam purposes, and will bounce your mail back.
If you wish to email me, change "Dnczrna" to "Danczarina"
VLeigh7023
In article <19970916171...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
dnc...@aol.com (Dnczrna) writes:
>
>It is what any decent, moral and right-minded individual would do, rather
>hiding behind a phony identity and slinging mud.
>
>Hmmmph!
>
>~D~
>
>
>
Go ~D~!!! I love it when you put things right where they belong! Anyone
who has not read the whole message (which I snipped), please do read it, as
Danzarina tells it like it is!
~Victoria~
Tom
Danczarina wrote,
> Well, Mr. or Ms. Wombat, I do not quite see where -you- fit into
> all this...I mean, you are claiming that this occured between Mr. Burmann
> and "SOMEONE ELSE". What business is it of yours, pray tell?
[snip]
Well, yes & no. (How's that for being decisive?) First, I can see that
someone, witnessing such a scene, could be so upset that (s)he just had to
let off steam & vent her indignation somehow. That's happened to me a few
times in my life, & I know how hard it can be to keep silent.
That's the no. As for the yes, you've said it already: There are 2 sides
to every issue, & we've heard only one side so far. Nobody can judge
properly who wasn't there at the time.
My own contacts with Mr Burmann have been limited to saying "Good morning."
It's taken two years to get him to respond to that; my impression is that
he's a rather shy man outside of class.
But, as for abusive teachers in general, & *NOT* taking sides on this
particular question, I think the thing one has to ask is whether what
you get is worth what you put up with. In some cases it is. I've heard
similar stories about the late Antony Tudor--similar, & perhaps worse--but
I also know at least one dancer who adored him. "Yes, he could tear you
down," he told me once, "but he could build you right up again."
My own feeling is that being abusive is counterproductive, in that it
doesn't elicit the best from your students, except perhaps for a tiny
minority whose response is "I'll show him!" But abusiveness seems to be
a long tradition in ballet training, & it takes time for such traditions
to die.
Tom Parsons
--
--
t...@panix.com | Life is not so rich in sources of pleasure
| that one can afford to neglect any of them.
http://www.panix.com/~twp | --Linus Pauling
or...@writeme.com
becca wrote:
> I think of a number of teacher's I had as a student who were this type, and
> I know I will never teach in this manner.
> I find it abusive, and downright horrible. It causes insecurities,
But rudeness for the sake of intimidation is a bunch of c...p.
> I have lived it and wouldn't want to put anyone through it.
> Although, I do have to agree with Jooss, that as a professional, there are
> many times this may occur. This is true mainly with the older AD's, who
> were trained this way, and still train this way. The younger teachers and
> AD's have decided it is lousy to do this and most have given it up. I can
> not justify mr. Burmann's behavior, nor any AD's. But it is true, it
> happens and one must grim...(yes M ) and bear it. It is horrible.!!
> Bek
As you said: It causes insecurities. Why should one *bear* this?
I had a Greek teacher once who couldn't stop giving compliments even if it was
not so good, but never really *taught* in her class!
On those rare occasions that she DID really teach, she yelled!
Strange, those "Old Fashioned" people! I learnt a whole lot more with
teachers who don't say "good!" very often, but mean it, and correct in a quiet
non abusive way!
And remember, the most succesful dancers on stage are not necessarily the best
teachers! SOME of these think that they can afford to be rude!
Rocio C. Barraza Rivacoba
X-18243-Poster: roci...@iserve.net.mx (Rocio C. Barraza Rivacoba)
Dnczrna wrote:
>
> X-18237-Poster: dnc...@aol.com (Dnczrna)
>
> womb...@aol.com (Wombat52) wrote:
>
> >It is one thing to teach strictly and well, which Burmann does. >It is
> quite another thing to insult publicly a highly intelligent, >capable
> longtime student who did absolutely nothing to cause >his outburst.
>
> Well, Mr. or Ms. Wombat, I do not quite see where -you- fit into
> all this...I mean, you are claiming that this occured between Mr. Burmann
> and "SOMEONE ELSE". What business is it of yours, pray tell?
>
> Did "Someone Else" specifically request that you go about besmirching Mr.
> Burmann's name? It would seem to me that this is a PRIVATE matter between
> "Someone Else" and this teacher.
>
> If, indeed, the incident you witnessed incensed you enough to want to tell
> everyone in Cyberspace, why are you hiding behind a screen name. You were
> only to happy to name Mr. Burmann specifically, but too cowardly to name
> thyself or "Someone Else".
>
> Now, why don't you and "Someone Else" be reasonable about this, and seek
> to find out why Mr. Burmann took the action that he did. From what so many
> others have attested, he is not an unreasonable man, besides being a
> well-respected teacher.
>
> Perhaps he was having a horrendous day. Who knows? In any case, if you or
> "Someone Else" did not attempt to even find out why, what right do you have
> to air this unfinished business. There are at least two sides to -every-
> story, and this one is blatantly one-sided, at this point!
>
> How about you and "Someone Else" getting off your high horse, quit making
> like the "National Enquirer", and bring this matter to resolution in a
> reasonable manner? Why not consider bringing the matter to an official
> Arbitrator/Mediator, if you really think it is so important?
>
> It is what any decent, moral and right-minded individual would do, rather
> hiding behind a phony identity and slinging mud.
>
> Hmmmph!
>
> ~D~
>
> ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
> Dnc...@aol.com is for anti-spam purposes, and will bounce your mail back.
> If you wish to email me, change "Dnczrna" to "Danczarina"
Danczarina:
YOu have spoken for many of us here!!! Well said!
--
Rocio C. Barraza Rivacoba
roci...@iserve.net.mx
http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/1854
"El Talento es el Trabajo" (en recuerdo de Miss Ana de Castillo)
GEHors
All I can add to Danczarina's message is Bravo! Bravo! What my daughter
wouldn't give to be taught more often by a man who CARES for the dance the
way Willie Burmann does!
Amy Reusch
>My own contacts with Mr Burmann have been limited to saying "Good morning."
>It's taken two years to get him to respond to that; my impression is that
>he's a rather shy man outside of class.
>
>
Just to add a little more to the feedback:
I've only taken one class with Mr. Burmann and shot one other (at the
request of a dancer not Mr. Burmann), and this was probably a dozen or more
years ago, so I have no idea what his style is like now. It was a good
class. The students danced well. Lourdes Lopez was at that time a
regular. The buzz at the time was that his was of *the* classes to take.
When I tried his class I found he seemed to exclusively pay attention to
the guys and ignor the women, and I guess by the time we were half way
through center, waiting alongside the barre for him to leave correcting the
guys and return his attention to giving the rest of class, I must have been
glaring at him. To his credit, he seemed to notice and came right over and
asked me to pirouette (which thank heavens were "on" that day) and then
left me alone. Most likely the guys were professional dancers, and there's
a tradition of giving top attention to the pros, and no doubt if he always
ignored women, Lourdes wouldn't have been there... but I wasn't convinced,
and didn't return, though probably it wasn't a great fit for my schedule
either. So, I guess I'm wondering, does he still [did he usually?] favor
the men in class to exclusion of the women? (which is hardly unusual
either) Again, I only heard good things about his teaching from others.
~ Amy
___________________________________________________________
Amy Reusch - eye4...@aol.com
Dance Videographer, now based in Hartford, CT
http://members.aol.com/eye4dance/home.htm
DANCE LINKS: http://www.dancer.com/dance-links
A.A.B. E-Mail Directory: http://www.dancer.com/email-links
Tom
Wombat52 wrote,
> Think we can end this thread....
...& we could, except that the post went on to say,
> Burmann is selling a service at a commercial studio....
...& there you've struck a nerve.
Teaching of any kind, whether it be private, public, university, or at a
commercial studio, whether it be dance or physics or history or English
lit. or home economics, is *not* selling a service. It's a professional
activity. Dentistry isn't selling a service, nor is law or any other
profession.
Please note carefully that in saying "professional," I don't mean to be
grandiose. There's another aspect of professionalism: the possibility
of failure & the fact that success depends on what you have to work with.
Ultimately it's a two-way proposition, between the professional & the
client. (Okay, in the case of medicine it's probably between the
professional & the client's immune system, but you know what I mean.)
Now, that said, I must observe that it cuts both ways. First, Burmann
mustn't be judged like a plumber. A plumber isn't trying to pass his
skills & training on to the customer. But second, that two-way aspect
means that teaching must inevitably be a collaboration between teacher
& pupil, a joint effort in quest of technique, understanding, knowledge,
or whatever end the particular kind of teaching serves; & good teaching
consists, inter alia, of ways of eliciting & encouraging the pupil's
participation in that collaboration. There are many ways of doing that.
Yes, you can do it, to a limited extent, by browbeating. I've already
said what I think of that approach. Reading Lili's terrific book on
American Indian ballerinas, I note that Maria Tallchief said that
Balanchine's approach was very low-key:
Balanchine was so intelligent & sensitive. He wouldn't say,
"horrible feet." On the contrary, he would quietly find a way
to make you aware of them.
(If you object to the implied comparison with Balanchine, please remember
that he himself said that he would be remembered as a teacher, not a
choreographer.)
As for not being fit to wipe a student's ballet slippers, I can think of
some students of mine whose ballet slippers I wouldn't have been fit to
wipe, if they had had them. (You don't find many computer science students
with ballet slippers. I had only one.) One of the glories of teaching is
getting students like that. But that's neither here nor there.
Finally, let me repeat what I said before: if you weren't there in the
class when the incident took place, you can't judge. I wasn't there, &
I won't judge. And I wouldn't have piped up now, except that I was a
teacher myself & I know about that collaboration business. (They told
me I was pretty good at that, in fact, but that's also neither here nor
there....) And I wasn't selling a service; none of us were. How much
easier life would have been if that had been all there was to it.
Wombat52
<<Subject: Re: Willy Burmann's Steps class.
<<From: amyr...@aol.com (Amy Reusch)
<<Date: 19 Sep 1997 16:09:05 GMT
<<Message-id: <19970919160...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
<<~ Amy
----------------------------------
Think we can end this thread. It certainly appears that some posters (not
you, Amy, e.g.) have not read carefully. Burmann is fair with his
corrections in class. No one is saying that he is not an excellent teacher,
BTW. Wombat *never* said that. And yes, it is (or was) *the* class to take.
However, Lourdes Lopez hasn't taken it for some time, and when she does
occasionally take class at Steps, it's not Burmann's. You will, however,
see Wendy Whelan, Philip Neal, Stacey Calvert, Kevin O'Day, et alia.
Burmann is a fine teacher but is otherwise a complete jerk and not fit to
wipe the ballet slippers of the person he abused. He has great delusions of
grandeur (probably coupled with an inferiority complex, which may be why he
picked on someone vastly more intelligent and better educated than he is;
he wouldn't dare do this to one of your precious little teenage darlings,
who are still under the spell of the Great Ballet Master). It just so
happens that the victim was always extremely polite and respectful toward
W.B., which makes his behavior doubly reprehensible.
Ergo, reiterating that Burmann is a wonderful teacher is *not* the point.
He's a rotten human being. Some of you naive types *just don't get* it.
Puhleez let's not hear anything more about his fabulous teaching skills.
They are *not* in dispute. And let's not get started on Robbins, Tudor, and
de Mille, who all reputedly got their results by emotionally abusing their
dancers. Burmann is selling a service at a commercial studio; those
choreographers were creating ballets. Not that Wombat defends emotional
abuse under any circumstances.
Dnczrna
Again, Mr. or Ms. Wombat, it seems you have failed to grasp the essence of
what is going on in this thread. So let me try to break it down into tiny
little pieces and explain it to you.
Now I freely admit that I am rather acerbic on occasion, and I can
certainly understand that you might be feeling a bit put upon at the
vehemence of my intitial post.
Ok, so let me try this again, because in all actuality, it is more
important to me that you "get it", than I come off looking clever and
"holier-than thou".
So, I get that you and your friend were just going your little ballet
businesses, giving it your best shot in this teacher's class. Then for
reasons which elude you and your friend, the teacher flies into a blind
rage, and singles your friend out as his whipping boy (or girl), BOOM! just
like that, out of the blue!
Well, you became incensed at this abhorrent behavior, and in your
indignation you sent out a cry to others not to patronize this teacher's
classes.
Is this the gist of what you are saying? If so, then of course, being a
decent human being, your sense of solidarity towards your beleagured
friend, and sense of outrage towards the teacher are natural,
understandable, and even justifiable reactions.
But what is NOT ok, is the way you took this -private- incident PUBLIC,
because, like it or not, that is what the internet is: a public forum.
I will be the first to admit that when someone else does something that
gets my goat, I will grumble under my breath about it to my friends, BUT, I
would never dream of broadcasting such inflammatory remarks over a public
venue, which is what you did.
And I would like to point out that you are missing the mark if you think
that posting a snippet from someone else's post about this teacher in some
way justifies what you have done, specifically Amy Reusch's.
There are some very marked differences between yours and Amy's approaches here:
1) She used her REAL name.
2) She stated some observations she had made about the teacher when she
took his class, and realized his method was not for her. But she gave him
credit for the work he did with other students, especially men, and she
invited others to post their observations about his teaching.
3) She decided not to return to his class.
Now let's contrast that to your approach:
1) You hid behind a screen name. (And lest you take me to task for using a
screen name when I post on aab, let me just say, I do so to protect myself
from an aab lurker, an unbalanced individual, who lives in the same town as
I do, and who has pestered me in the past. Also, I never misuse my postion
of anonomity to make inflammatory posts).
2) You did a hatchet job on the teacher's character, with no regard to the
kind of results he achieves with any of his other students. Amy
acknowledged that at least some of his students do well. You did not
solicit anyone else's opinion about this teacher. You were judge, jury and
executioner.
3) Rather than just not returning to his class, and realizing that not all
teachers work well for all students, you willfully attempted to ruin this
teacher's reputation. Grumbling under one's breath to one's own private
circle is one thing, but you crossed the line into the realm of public slander.
Do you realize that what you have said about Mr. Burmann is now
permanently archived? Now anyone will be able to look up his name in
DejaNews, and read your vile little remarks, with no sort of substantiation
as to their validity.
Do think that Mr. Burmann really deserves that? Do you feel justified
because you think, "Well, what he did to my friend was bad, so I am getting
even!"
Mr. or Ms. Wombat, since when do two wrongs make a right? If we all acted
out on our dislike for others in such ways, this would be a most unpleasant
world indeed! Why not, in the future, consider actually RISING ABOVE the
bad behavior of others, when they do something which strikes you as distastful?
Ok, so maybe this teacher is no saint, but I am going to level with you
here and tell you that only reason your post elicited all these vehement
responses is that your methodology in dealing with the situation was seen
by most as by far more ignoble than any crimes Mr. Burmann had committed.
Now do you get it?
Ok, I will climb off my soapbox now...
~D~
=========================================================
womb...@aol.com (Wombat52) wrote:
<<Subject: Re: Willy Burmann's Steps class.
<<From: amyr...@aol.com (Amy Reusch)
<<Date: 19 Sep 1997 16:09:05 GMT
<<Message-id: <19970919160...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
<<In article <5vncv0$8...@panix3.panix.com>, t...@panix.com (Tom) <<writes:
<<>My own contacts with Mr Burmann have been limited to saying "Good
<<morning."
<<>It's taken two years to get him to respond to that; my impression is <<that
<<>he's a rather shy man outside of class.
<<Just to add a little more to the feedback:
<<I've only taken one class with Mr. Burmann and shot one other (at the
<<request of a dancer not Mr. Burmann), and this was probably a dozen or <<more
<<years ago, so I have no idea what his style is like now. It was a good
<<class. The students danced well. Lourdes Lopez was at that time a
<<regular. The buzz at the time was that his was of *the* classes to <<take.
<<When I tried his class I found he seemed to exclusively pay attention to
<<the guys and ignor the women, and I guess by the time we were half way
<<through center, waiting alongside the barre for him to leave correcting <<the
<<guys and return his attention to giving the rest of class, I must have <<been
<<glaring at him. To his credit, he seemed to notice and came right over <<and
<<asked me to pirouette (which thank heavens were "on" that day) and then
<<left me alone. Most likely the guys were professional dancers, and <<there's
TimVictor
> (You don't find many computer science students
> with ballet slippers. I had only one.)
Gosh, Tom... Sometimes money was tight when I was in school, but I never
had to cut it quite that close to the bone!
So did you do a whole barre working just one leg and then repeat it on the
other side with the slipper on the other foot? Or did you have to switch
the slipper every time you changed hands on the barre? Either way, I'll
bet you were glad that ballet slippers are made to fit either foot.
Tim :-)
Tom
TimVictor (timv...@aol.com) wrote:
Well...that's kind of misleading. I *tried* to economize by buying only
one shoe, but nobody would sell anything less than a pair. But I saved
money by *wearing* only one at a time.
Changing shoes as we went from left side to right side wasn't so bad,
except when the two sides were combined with a sous-sus & de'tourne'. I
usually missed out on about a third of the exercise before I got the shoe
changed. And once, when we were doing grand battements & I was bent over
changing my shoe...but I won't go into that. :-) But the real question was
whether to wear the shoe on the working foot or the supporting foot. Maria
Youskevitch wanted it on the supporting foot, but David Howard, when I
consulted him, gave me a *very* funny look & said it should go on the
working foot. I never did get that figured out.
I was so glad when I got a consulting job & could afford two shoes at once.
I gave the old ones to a girl who was going to pose for Harvey Edwards.
Tom
JSatinoff
I've been following this thread for a little while and I find some of the
comments pretty disturbing. What is the "old school" thing. I've studied
with many teachers who would be called old school. They are not abusive or
negative. I don't remember Mr. Vilzak or Madame Schollar being abusive or
anything of the kind. Neither was Harold Christianson or for that matter
Duncan Noble or many other "old School" teachers that I had. I took
classes from Darvash for several years when I was a dancer with the Feld
Ballet and enjoyed her classes very much. I didn't find her abusive at
all. This is not to say that abuse doesn't happen. As I said I danced
with Eliot Feld's company (for ten years) so I know what abuse can be.
However, I got a great deal out of being with Eliot's company abuse and
all. I'm not saying it's right but the reality is that it's out there and
there is no such thing as "old school abuse". Also, because a teacher is
demanding that doesn't make him or her abusive. It's ok to have
expectations of your students and to insist that they work in your class.
Teachers get frustrated and lose their tempers sometimes just like anyone
else. It's important to understand your frustration and work the student
to help them accomplish the goal you're aiming for. Getting angry can be a
tool. Used wisely it can be helpful. Unwisely it becomes abuse. Good
professional teachers understand this but people are human and even
Burmann and Darvash sometimes lose their cool and make mistakes.
Jeff Satinoff
Leigh Witchel
That's him, Lauren.
LAW
In article <607cps$5...@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>,
Miles Humphrey <mhum...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Please excuse my ignorance, because I have never taken classes at
>steps, but I'm not sure who Willy Burmann is. Is he the gray haired
>man, in some of the Steps advertisements in Dance Magazine? And would
>he possibly be Alessandra Ferri's coach? Because at ABT (summer '96) I
>saw a tall, gray haired man giving Alessandra a private lesson, and I
>know the teacher was from Steps. I am curious if that is Willy Burmann.
> Thanks!
>
>Lauren
Miles Humphrey
Leigh Witchel
We've had this exact same discussion before, and I admit to still being
mystified by your viewpoint on the subject.
Are you saying that good results justify improper behavior? Are you
saying that that people who feel somehow abused by a teacher are merely
over-sensitive? Are you saying it's OK for a teacher to have a bad day
and take it out on his or her students? If so, how many bad days?
Probably not, I think basically what you're saying is that you never
noticed any improper behavior in the classes of the teachers you
mentioned. Fair enough, but I can speak from personal experience about
one of them, and from the experience of friends about another in the list
you named. I'd say that calling someone an idiot in class is abusive.
I'd say that inappropriate fondling of a minor is abusive. I'm not saying
this to slander or ruin careers, nor do I intend to name names.
Abusive behavior DOES occur. It is not about being demanding, or losing
your temper or having a bad day. It is about the teacher's inability to
control his or her own anger and insecurities. The teacher is supposed to
be the adult and leader in the room. Should we expect them to be
superhuman? They cannot. Should we expect them to be able to control
their own temper? At minimum. If not, they have no business being in a
leadership position.
LAW
In article
<19970922213...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
JSatinoff
>Are you saying that good results justify improper behavior? Are you
>saying that that people who feel somehow abused by a teacher are merely
>over-sensitive? Are you saying it's OK for a teacher to have a bad day
>and take it out on his or her students? If so, how many bad days
I'm not saying any of the things that you have mentioned. Clearly
fondling a student in an improper way is abuse. Taking out your
frustrations on a student is wrong on any day, period.
I am saying that there is not a single good teacher that I know of that
doesn't have his or her detracters. There have been plenty of negative
things said about both Burman and Davash yet both have large followings
and are good teachers. Whether you approve of them or not. It makes no
diference. There's nothing strange or odd about what I have to say except
that I think your wrong! (In this case)
I never felt that Finis Jung was such a great teacher. That doesn't mean
he's not. There are plenty of people who feel he's wonderful. They take
his class. I take elsewhere. Actually I don't take class elswhere anymore
I'm too retired for class on a regular basis nowadays. You get my drift.
Over the years I've heard plenty of nasty things said about lots of
teachers. Usually they're made by students who didn't do well in their
class or just didn't click with the teacher.
Personalities play an important role in the way teachers and students work
together. Willy and Gabby have pretty big egos. Don't like working with
teachers like this. Take elsewhere.
By the way before you make comments like "fondling students" in such a
public forum you'd better be damn sure of what your saying. Saying it in
this thread in this way infers that you are talking about the teachers
beings discussed here.
Did one of the teachers mentioned fondle a student in an inapropriate way?
If not why mention it?
>"I'd say that inappropriate fondling of a minor is abusive."
Jeff Satinoff
Leigh Witchel
I'm getting the feeling that any discussion on this issue that we have is
merely going to be each of us re-stating our position. Yours tends to be
that a teacher's behavior should be judged seperately from their ability
to teach. I don't believe so, because it perpetuates a problem and image
that has plagued ballet for a while now.
I truly wish to avoid ad hominem attacks upon the people you mentioned, in
many cases these people have retired and such attacks are moot. I
mentioned groping because it did occur, however you are correct in that it
did not occur to me, it occured to two different people, but I have lost
contact with both of them (I was told about both incidents the better part
of a decade ago.) So I questioned my mentioning of it as I cannot at
present substantiate it. Again, it is not mentioned to ruin a career,
which is why I am not mentioning it in detail. It is mentioned to say
that the same people you didn't see any problem with were the people I had
heard problems about (in both cases from students who *had* done well in
the pertinent class.)
Gaby or Willy do not need your defense or my attacks, obviously, they both
have plenty of devoted students (As to Buhrmann, I took his class exactly
once, didn't like it, and so didn't go back. I have no real opinion on
him as a teacher except that he was not for me.) It's obvious that at an
adult age the best solution is to simply find another teacher. But I can
say from personal experience in this case that a teacher who consistently
reiterates "Only I can make you a dancer." is trying to make that option
difficult.
In conclusion, the point of my discussion is not to attack a specific
teacher. It is to suggest to people that good teaching is not seperate
from adult behavior. To justify it as being preparation for the harsh
realities of the professional world in ballet perpetuates the problem on
both the level of teacher and company director. And the student who
experiences abuse from a teacher could very well become a teacher or
choreographer who does the same thing to his or her students, and
rationalizes it. And the cycle never gets broken. I'm not saying a
teacher needs to be Mother Theresa. I am saying that a teacher must
recognize their obligation as an educator and leader in the room, and
think before they act. Of course they will make some mistakes. But if
it's not even an issue we are in a very bad state.
LAW
In article <19970923124...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
JSatinoff
Whoops! I didn't do the quote thing very well.
Your point is well taken. This discussion should take place. It's
important to the art form. I agree completely that a teachers behavior is
part of being a good teacher. I just know that I got a lot out of some
very tough teachers. I didn't care that much how a teacher behaved (as
long as it wasn't what I considered out of line) and as long as I got out
of the class what I wanted.
I do have a problem with the idea that "old school" is always abusive.
It's not. Maybe my threshold for personality conflicts is higher than some
. I don't know. I have always loved dance and loved what I have gained
through being a part of this art form warts and all.
The discussions can be pretty lively sometimes can't they.
Jeff S.
Philip Rosemond
Yes, Jeff, I agree with your statement "better be damn sure what
you're talking about". We live in an age of frivolous lawsuits...
particularily against male ballet teachers. It a shame that
I have to make sure I _don't_ use touch in the process of teaching
my classes. If I do, a disgruntled student could turn it
around and say I'm being abusive. Using one's hands to show
a correct placement etc. can be very helpful...and now its found
its way into adagio class...how do you teach/perform partnering
without touching!?!?! Its insidious.
And, then, yet again, how do we draw the line between
"right touch and wrong touch" in the studio.
I have known a couple of teachers who have
crossed that line; one is sitting in jail as I speak...I
think the only way, to establish a safe "manual" method
incorporated into ones teaching technique is intent of
instruction, clear communication with a sensitivity to
ones use of language, and demonstration.
If a student is insensitive enough not to know the difference,
then are they sensitive enough to be a dancer? If not, leave
alone. If they're onlyh insecure, teach em, but leave em alone.
Beyond this I don't know any more answers because I don't think
there is a clear cut answer to a student who will place false
accusations. To those who expose someone who has truely done
harm, I applaud. The problem is, there are _so many_ false and
emotionally driven accusations, it degrades and makes the real
ones a "cry wolf" situation. If a student "just doesn't like"
a teacher or their class, they can meliciously accuse or file
false charges against them. Its tough on both students and
teachers. We need to be cognizant of what we're doing,
I suppose.
Comments?
Yours, Philip S. Rosemond, looking for more teaching work
in Seattle.
becca
becca
X-18474-Poster: becca <be...@aros.net>
Jeff:
> I take elsewhere. Actually I don't take class elswhere anymore
>I'm too retired for class on a regular basis nowadays. You get my >drift.
How wonderful for you to live in NY where you and others have a choice.
When I was dancing professionally, there was no choice. It was go with the
flow or lose the job. Now, since I have problems like being really short
for ballet and was lucky to even get a job, I was not going to give it up.
So, I had very little choice.
But why should my son, who was in Nutcracker be Mind F...K at age 12 by the
same ballet mistress? (he was, yet she will never understand nor admit to
the problem. The entire town agrees with this, but we have no way to get
her gone. All we can do is work and pick at it little pieces at a time.)
Also, do to her, certain young adult students in college were forbidden to
get diplomas and graduate for one course. I know of two of them. One for
her BFA the other for her Masters.
Also, one of the faculty at the university has just quit do to the abusive
type of treatment given.
>
>Over the years I've heard plenty of nasty things said about lots of
>teachers. Usually they're made by students who didn't do well in their
>class or just didn't click with the teacher.
Another incident, personal, was that I was totally the favorite in class.
But when I was taken into the company, I became persona non grata. I was
not the only one. Actually, this happened to almost every friend I had who
danced in this class, then went on professionally to the company affliated
with the school.
Ok, I was Not a person who did not click with the teacher.
so, there is a very real problem in some people who teach. I will not make
Any comments on Burmann, I have never taken his classes.
But I will say there is a real threat to the children and the students if
teachers such as I had continue to be in positions of power.
Bek
>>
>
>
becca
X-18462-Poster: becca <be...@aros.net>
Law:
wonderfully put and excellently written. I too have been a "victim" of
this teacher/AD abuse and it is something No One should have to put up
with. Also, these people should Not be in a position of power, and yet
they are. Go figure. I hate it,
Coming from someone who went through the mind trip abuse!
Bek
>We've had this exact same discussion before, and I admit to still being
>mystified by your viewpoint on the subject.
>
>Are you saying that good results justify improper behavior? Are you
>saying that that people who feel somehow abused by a teacher are merely
>over-sensitive? Are you saying it's OK for a teacher to have a bad day
EYVONNE GRATZ
X-18481-Poster: tu...@aztec.asu.edu (EYVONNE GRATZ)
How about abuse from students....
been there from both ends.
JSatinoff
Phillip,
The touching thing has become an issue in dance class. Frankly I think
that it's pretty clear when a teacher is touching a student inapropriately.
It's especially clear to the student. I'm very careful not to touch a
student in way that can be misunderstood in anyway. If you are clear as to
what you are doing, precise and professional in your approach you've got
nothing to worry about.
The age of the student also comes into play here. What is appropriate for
a younger student may not be for an older student and visa versa. Mostly,
common sense works well. The best rule of thumb is just to be aware of
what you are doing and how it might be perceived by the student.
Tough issue. Can be a can of worms but it doesn't have too if you just
think about what you're doing.
Students and professional dancers are beginning to speak up about this
problem. There have been incidents recently both in schools and companies
where inapropriate touching and worse have been dealt with. I personally
think it's a good thing that these teachers and Artistic Director have
been called on the carpet for this.
Jeff S.
becca
X-18500-Poster: becca <be...@aros.net>
We post in our brochure that we teach with a "hands on" method. We will
correct by manipulating the body parts to form the correct placement for
ballet. But, I too have warned my staff, and self that too much handleing
is dangerous, esp. for a disgruntled student.,
At least we live in SLC, it is still not as bad as NY or the larger cities
where saying something, or doing something will get you sued,
I sometimes wish I could towards the parents who have bad mouthed me, and
the studio. Ah well, we are public, therefore can not claim a law suit.
Besides it is not worth it.
Bek
Philippe
As a Ballet Pianist, I can tell you that so many of my peers are
absolutly unable to play intelligently for class, that it is very
difficult for a ballet teacher to get what he wants from his/her
accompanist.
I don't know Mr Burman, but I have played for some "tough" teachers in
Europe, and never had a problem, and I am almost sure I would not have
any problem with this teacher.
Go in Europe and you'll see Teachers being so demanding and strict that
Mr Burman will seem very sweet and easy to deal with.
Art and Dance in particular, are not made for weak people it is very
hard and painful to get to a respectable level. If you cannot take
truthful criticism then art is not your thing.
BTW I am a respected Conductor for Ballet and believe me my musicians
have to be up to my demands. Am I abusive too???
becca
X-18527-Poster: becca <be...@aros.net>
Truthful criticism is fine, it is the manner in which it is delivered.
It can be constructive, or destructive. If it is said in a way that makes
an artist feel small, and degraded it is abusive. Also, you may not get
out of that person what you actually want. It may be easier to allow this
for adults, but it should not be done with young students.
My opinion :(
Bek
Koo
becca <be...@aros.net> wrote:
>
>X-18527-Poster: becca <be...@aros.net>
>
>Truthful criticism is fine, it is the manner in which it is delivered.
>It can be constructive, or destructive. If it is said in a way that makes
>an artist feel small, and degraded it is abusive. Also, you may not get
>out of that person what you actually want. It may be easier to allow this
>for adults, but it should not be done with young students.
>My opinion :(
>Bek
What about this situation? At my daughter's former ballet school, the
teacher/owner and artistic director (all same person) had a belief
that if you "play" upon the students' natural rivalry, they will
perform better. For instance, my daughter and another girl (who
started out as best friends) were constantly pitted against each
other to compete for parts, double cast in the same roles, etc. This
was because they had similar body types and style of dance, same
height, weight, etc. It became very obvious what she was doing, to
the point where she said to me in a casual conversation, "well, I know
I do this on purpose--they fight it out and give me what I want this
way---it works!" And you know what? It did work, as far as the
teacher was concerned. But in the meantime, these kids would get into
horrible battles, cry, and ended up with little self-esteem. But
ironically, it did seem to work in the sense that when someone
succumbed and dropped out, the other was the victor. I am talking
about kids age 10 and 11. We put up with this for years before we
realized it does NOT go on everywhere.
And, another perspective on this is something that maybe even this
teacher never realized: my daughter has learned valuable lessons from
this and has a much stronger character because of it. But there's a
price--she doesn't have real close friends and has a very hard time
trusting anyone. There are all different categories of abuse, some
not as obvious as others.
Jooss
>For instance, my daughter and another girl (who
>started out as best friends) were constantly pitted against each
>other to compete for parts, double cast in the same roles, etc. This
>was because they had similar body types and style of dance, same
>height, weight, etc. It became very obvious what she was doing, to
>the point where she said to me in a casual conversation, "well, I know
>I do this on purpose--they fight it out and give me what I want this
>way---it works!" And you know what? It did work, as far as the
>teacher was concerned.
Yo Mama - how do you think it works in dance companies. Artistic
directors, choreographers, ballet masters and mistresses. etc. do the same
thing. They don't have a choice - dancers with similar body types are
constantly "competing for the same roles." If that is not logical, what is.
If the kids don't learn to deal with that reality when they are young,
they will not survive in the professional world of dance. Sorry - being a
dancer is not for the faint-of-heart or hot heads. Jooss
becca
X-18553-Poster: becca <be...@aros.net>
It may be easier to allow this
>>for adults, but it should not be done with young students.
>>My opinion :(
>>Bek
>
>What about this situation? At my daughter's former ballet school, the
>teacher/owner and artistic director (all same person) had a belief
>that if you "play" upon the students' natural rivalry, they will
has a much stronger character because of it. But there's a
>price--she doesn't have real close friends and has a very hard time
>trusting anyone. There are all different categories of abuse, some
>not as obvious as others.
Koo:
Well, there is the perfect example of the "old school" of thought.
Pit bull stragegy. I hate it. Natural competitiveness will out, anyway.
But to foster it in young children is, in my mind, a crime.
I realize that many teachers still do this. This is what I mean by playing
with a kids (students) mind.
What is the point.? They would have competited for these things out of
natural instinct anyway, but still would have been friends. One does not
have to do away with the other. And the loser would still have to be
learning that it is ok to be Not chosen. The winner would have to learn to
be kind and considerate of her friend who is hurt by what happened. Why
foster it, and make a big deal out of the situation. This is cruel, and I
am sure many of us from this form of training may be stronger, but have
spent many hours in Therapy too.
It is not worth it. Esp. when one doesn't know if the child is even
professional material. Heck, by age 15 or 16 one may decide she hates
dance, or would rather do other things, but the teacher has warped her for
life in her personal relationships. It is abusive.
Downright Abusive...Sorry folks but that is my opinion
Bek
Koo
jo...@aol.com (Jooss) wrote:
>
>Yo Mama - how do you think it works in dance companies. Artistic
>directors, choreographers, ballet masters and mistresses. etc. do the same
>thing. They don't have a choice - dancers with similar body types are
>constantly "competing for the same roles." If that is not logical, what is.
>
>If the kids don't learn to deal with that reality when they are young,
>they will not survive in the professional world of dance. Sorry - being a
>dancer is not for the faint-of-heart or hot heads. Jooss
>
>
>Jo...@aol.com
Obviously, this IS how it works in dance companies. I am not an
idiot. However, as I said in my original post, these kids were 10
years old. Sorry, but because of the friendships that were destroyed
in this process, this is WAY TOO YOUNG to be doing this to kids. They
are mature and ready for it when they reach company age. Not at age
10. There is a time and a place for this sort of thing. I don't
think anything in my post could be construed as being "faint-of-heart"
or "hot heads". I was merely responding to the turn this thread has
taken, different types of abuse--or maybe manipulation would be a
better word. And the post I responded to was related to kids. My
daughter has been at SAB now for 3 years as a resident student. If
she was in the least "faint of heart", she would have been crushed a
long time ago. Koo
Jean Fitzpatrick
X-18578-Poster: Jean Fitzpatrick <jgfitz...@ibm.net>
Koo wrote:
>
> X-18562-Poster: k...@monmouth.com (Koo)
Bravo Koo for your developmental viewpoint. The child who grows up in a
reasonably healthy environment is much better able to cope with the
killer competition and arbitrariness of the adult world in many fields.
Jean
becca
X-18573-Poster: becca <be...@aros.net>
A However, as I said in my original post, these kids were 10
>years old. Sorry, but because of the friendships that were destroyed
>in this process, this is WAY TOO YOUNG to be doing this to kids. They
>are mature and ready for it when they reach company age. Not at age
>10. There is a time and a place for this sort of thing. I don't
>think anything in my post could be construed as being "faint-of-heart"
>or "hot heads". I was merely responding to the turn this thread has
>taken, different types of abuse--or maybe manipulation would be a
>better word. And the post I responded to was related to kids. My
>daughter has been at SAB now for 3 years as a resident student. If
>she was in the least "faint of heart", she would have been crushed a
>long time ago. Koo
Bravo, Koo
Well said.
I think I multiple sent my ans. to the group by accident...
Sorry!!
Bek
becca
Jooss:
Yes, as a professional we do that. But damn it, it does NOT need to be
done in a school at ages 6-13yrs. How the heck do we as teachers even know
if the kid will go on to be a professional.?
This type of treatment scars kids for life. They will have plenty of
experience with this horrible type of competition, and actually be stronger
by having built self confidence in themselves at an early age rather than
beaten down by a sadistic teacher and have a lousy self esteem.
I am Not saying they should not be corrected, told what is needed, dealt
with a firm discipline to control themselves. But, knocking the poor kids
and pitting each kid at such a young age is red.
And it is totally unnecessary. The competition will be there. It is
inevitable. If two kids are alike in body and ability, then they will be
vying for the same role etc. The teacher should not act to create more
problems for them. These are the kids that grow up and become the Horror
tales of companies. They are always whining, always wanting to know why
they didn't get this role or why this didn't happen, as if it should have.
And if they get the role, by god, Don't get near them. They are like the
genie that comes out of a bottle, the egos inflate like humongous balloons,
and everyone wants to kill them.
Why not have a civilized situation? Who says the way it was is the way it
should be? The best person may or may not get the role.
Either way, both professionals should deal with it in a controlled
civilized manner. This is not what happens when a child is raised in the
atmosphere of total competition.
Just tonight I went to the ballet and found out two very interesting facts.
1: a former graduate of mine is learning the ways of politics in ballet.
She dealt with me and the school, and is totally in charge of herself now.
She can handle the ups and downs and realizes that the competition is not
with another, but with yourself. And she thanked me for teaching her that.
And also, to deal with the reality as it comes along.
2: 2nd and 3rd casts of a certain ballet were not used under our new
director. The other director would cast, and no matter how good or bad it
turned out, they would dance the role. But now, it is on merit. The
professional dancers..one of my graduates from long ago, didn't get to
perform. She was tremendously upset. Well, they were told why. She has
been resting on her natural ablate for years, and now she must work poor
kid! WEll, I think that is great. She will have to make sure she puts
some real effort into what she is doing.
This is a life lesson. Not nasty, just real life. Well that is ok.
That is what it is about...work and get rewarded.
So, I have a major disagreement with your response to the post. Esp. when
dealing with young students. We don't even know if they will continue to
dance past a certain point. And I will bet they will not stay very long in
a private small studio that acts in this fashion.
And they shouldn't.
Bek
>>For instance, my daughter and another girl (who
>>started out as best friends) were constantly pitted against each
>>other to compete for parts, double cast in the same roles, etc. This
>>was because they had similar body types and style of dance, same
>>height, weight, etc. It became very obvious what she was doing, to
>>the point where she said to me in a casual conversation, "well, I know
>>I do this on purpose--they fight it out and give me what I want this
>>way---it works!" And you know what? It did work, as far as the
>>teacher was concerned.
>
Cpmomcat
Jean Fitzpatrick <jgfitz...@ibm.net> wrote
>Bravo Koo for your developmental viewpoint. The child who grows up in a
>reasonably healthy environment is much better able to cope with the
>killer competition and arbitrariness of the adult world in many fields.
---(in response to Koo's excellent response):
> Obviously, this IS how it works in dance companies. I am not an
> idiot. However, as I said in my original post, these kids were 10
> years old. Sorry, but because of the friendships that were destroyed
> in this process, this is WAY TOO YOUNG to be doing this to kids. They
> are mature and ready for it when they reach company age. Not at age
> 10. There is a time and a place for this sort of thing. I don't
> think anything in my post could be construed as being "faint-of-heart"
> or "hot heads". I was merely responding to the turn this thread has
> taken, different types of abuse--or maybe manipulation would be a
> better word. And the post I responded to was related to kids. My
> daughter has been at SAB now for 3 years as a resident student. If
> she was in the least "faint of heart", she would have been crushed a
> long time ago. Koo
---(which was in response to Jooss's post)
> jo...@aol.com (Jooss) wrote:
>
> >
> >Yo Mama - how do you think it works in dance companies. Artistic
> >directors, choreographers, ballet masters and mistresses. etc. do the same
> >thing. They don't have a choice - dancers with similar body types are
> >constantly "competing for the same roles." If that is not logical, what is.
> >
> >If the kids don't learn to deal with that reality when they are young,
> >they will not survive in the professional world of dance. Sorry - being a
> >dancer is not for the faint-of-heart or hot heads. Jooss
> >
> >
> >Jo...@aol.com
>
I agree so completely with Jean and Koo - I believe that NOTHING is gained
by trying to raise extrememly competitive, cold-hearted and isolated
children with the excuse of *preparing them*. Fostering this in children
in order to prepare them for the competition in the adult world (of ballet
or any other field) just doesn't make any sense. It reminds me of
something that Eliot Feld said. When a board member asked why he required
all the expensive sprung-flooring for the studios at 890 Broadway (which
were the first dance studios in that building by the way), Feld explained
about injuries and muscles and bone stress, etc. The board member
responded with a question that went like 'But aren't many, or even most, of
the theaters you perform in around the country non-sprung and aren't most
of your rehearsal spaces while on tour non-sprung?' Feld agreed that these
were the conditions he all too often met, but Feld countered that if the
board member knew that he would be soon faced with not having enough food
should he starve himself now so that he was prepared for the hardships he
would be facing? Would he not be stronger to have had the benefits of good
food, and good training conditions so that he might better deal with the
hardships to come? I would think that this applies to this subject as
well. One doesn't need to have been abused to be able to deal with abuse -
one actually needs the opposite of that in order to better handle the
challenge. I think the same thinking applies here.
Cathy P
VLeigh7023
In article <19970929170...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
cpmo...@aol.com (Cpmomcat) writes:
>One doesn't need to have been abused to be able to deal with abuse -
>one actually needs the opposite of that in order to better handle the
>challenge. I think the same thinking applies here.
>
>Cathy P
Very well stated, Cathy!
~Victoria~
WBenn1510
Bravo Koo and Cathy P. and Jean Fitzpatrick.>
elenakn...@gmail.com
> Willy Burmann, teaching ballet at Steps Studio in NYC, is capable of
> abusing, in an old-fashioned, now discredited manner, mature students who
> have been working with him for years and who certainly know what they are
> doing. He seems to forget that these people are buying a service from him
> and can easily take their business elsewhere. He recently was
> unconscionably rude and abusive to a loyal longtime student who had done
> absolutely nothing to incur his wrath. And this is only one of several such
> incidents. That student quietly left the class and will neither study with
> nor speak to him again.
>
> We are not talking about some of the eccentrics who have been taking class
> for years, do not improve, and seem to be in their own little dream worlds,
> but about people with a certain level of accomplishment who also know how
> to behave in class. Burmann is also abusive to several of the pianists,
> which is ridiculous since he appears to know next to nothing about music
> himself. There are other good teachers at Steps; patronize them instead. Or
> go to another studio. Regrettably, there are a lot fewer dance studios than
> there used to be. But don't give Burmann your business.
Yes, I just saw it because he died today. It was traumatic to me to remember working with him just one week.I was one of the pianists playing for his classes. Couldn't understand why he was so mean to me. I have master degree in music. I thought about 2 things: I'm woman and I'm from Russia. Probably hateful combination for him.