Tuesday, December 6, 2011

The David H. Koch Nutcracker

-- by Tom Phillips

Battle scene from Balanchine's Nutcracker
When New York City Ballet and New York City Opera announced in 2008 that David H. Koch would donate 100 million dollars to renovate the New York State Theater, the opera called it a “transformative gift.” The ballet said it would “ensure the integrity of George Balanchine’s vision for the theater ..for decades to come.”  Three years later the renovation is complete.  But the opera company has left the building, now called the David H. Koch Theater, and Balanchine’s vision is in the dumpster.  Lincoln Center, conceived as a place where high culture would be available to the masses, is becoming just another exclusive haunt for the One Percent.   

I came to this realization a few days ago, as I went to buy tickets for Balanchine’s Nutcracker.  This has been a family tradition since the 1960s, a holiday ritual that began at the box office in November.  At the New York State Theater, there was always a long line at the ticket windows, a New York social occasion.  People would chat animatedly as they waited, checking and re-checking a color-coded chart of seat availability.   Popular pricing was the rule, as it had been since the theater opened in 1964, when good seats were available for as little as 2 dollars.  Ticket prices crept up along with inflation over the years, but they were well below Broadway prices, and far below those at the Metropolitan Opera across the way.  My habit had been to buy a half-dozen tickets in the third or fourth ring, for something less than a day’s pay, and bring the family, along with occasional friends, relatives and neighbors, to an aesthetic feast that also served as an introduction to the art of ballet.  And I never went just once.  Besides the family excursions, I would return for multiple looks at different casts.  In addition to  cheap seats in the fourth ring, the State Theater offered standing room for a few dollars.  Once the curtain went up, you could take any empty seat.            

Visions of Sugar Plum Fairies were dancing in my head as I approached the theater last week, but this time, things were different.   There was no line at the box office.  The only other person was a middle-aged woman, a refugee from the Metropolitan Opera box office, hyperventilating over her discovery that opera tickets could cost $400.   

Things were nearly as shocking at the Koch box office.  When I inquired about seats in the third ring, the price quoted was $112 per ticket.  Expletive deleted.  Apologies to box office clerk, whose fault it wasn’t.  In a mild state of shock, I settled for just two seats in the fourth ring, at $91 each.  Further inquiries yielded the information that ticket prices begin at $29, but those $29 seats are not available for all performances, and when they are, they are just a very few of the worst seats in the house, with obstructed views or impossible sight lines.  I realized dimly that my family tradition is shot -- no more group excursions to the Nutcracker.  One final blow: inquiring about standing room, I find it is no longer offered except when the entire house is sold out.         

A look at the NYCB website makes it clear that the company has adopted an opaque pricing system that treats its customers like airline passengers, withholding information and aiming to charge whatever the market will bear.  Prices are no longer openly published on the website; one must click on a date and a section of the theater to get a quote.  There is, however, an advertised special for the wealthy.  For $225 a ticket, NYCB now offers a bloc of “VIP Sweet Seats”, front and center in the orchestra section.  These come with perks including a discount at the gift shop. 

All this may suit the one-percenters, who don’t like to wait in lines and don’t care what tickets cost.  But it ignores the vision of Balanchine and Lincoln Kirstein, and the other founders of Lincoln Center.  In the mid-20th century, they set out to democratize the arts.  In the 21st century, their  successors want to take the arts back for themselves. 

A footnote to my own story: of the kids I brought to the Nutcracker over the years, three went on to study at the School of American Ballet, all three performed in the Nutcracker, and one went on to a career in ballet.  This was a natural result of Balanchine and Kirstein’s plan.  In order to build an American ballet company, they needed to put ballet on display for the broad public, and draw in future generations of dancers.  Balanchine’s Nutcracker, and the New York State Theater itself were made for that mission.   

The Nutcracker ballet is a vision of discovery.  It begins with children’s games of leapfrog and ring-around-the-rosy, proceeds through a family folk-dance, a magic show and a dream to a land of pure dancing delight, climaxing in a romantic pas de deux for a fairy queen and her cavalier.  To see it as a child is often to dream of making that journey oneself.  Not to see it is never to know.   Most of NYCB’s dancers have not come from privileged backgrounds, but started out as kids who came, saw and took the journey.  What will the future hold, if excursions to the land of sweets are limited to the children of VIPs?
Copyright 2011 by Tom Phillips
Photo by Paul Kolnick


  1. thank you. it makes me sick and so very very sad

  2. Bill ChristophersenDecember 7, 2011 at 7:40 PM

    "Amen, brother. It's of a piece with the defunding of the National Endowment for the Arts on the national level. Your family Christmas tradition? Well, maybe you can take the grandkids for a scenic walk around Trump Village followed by pizza slices all around, eh?"

  3. So so sad. To see large swaths of the "cheap seats" idle is disheartening. The 4th ring always provided a heartbeat and is sorely missed.

  4. It doesn't have to be this way.
    NYCB could win its audience back if it would just address its own problems. I'll be writing more about this soon.
    Thanks for reading and commenting. Tom

  5. Bravo, Tom. The same damn thing happened with Theatre Row (42nd between 8th and 9th) that was supposed to be for us off-off-Broadway folks. Now, it is a king's ransom.

  6. This is such a wonderful article. As a dancer, I sincerely believe ballet should be available to anyone and everyone who wishes to see it. Student prices, rush tickets, standing room; all should be available to anyone who wants to participate in the art. The rising prices at NYCB and elsewhere are heartbreaking indeed and only perpetuate ballet's "elitist" reputation.

  7. This is a terrible development, paralleling the soaring admission fees for big-city museums.

    Why, however, the emphasis on Koch as the culprit? Did he have anything at all to do with the raising of ballet ticket prices? For all I know, he might be as incensed as the rest of us that his generosity has been diverted for the entertainment of the rich alone.

  8. Thanks, Tom. This needs to be said. Perhaps we'll see an Occupy Lincoln Center at some point.
    Peggy Kane

  9. You're right, I don't know and didn't try to say what Koch's role has been in the price hikes.
    I think the lead culprit here is the Board of New York City Ballet.

  10. The title of this piece is occupy the arts. I am not sure that the 99% who are already priced out of the theater can accomplish anything through boycott. I would be interested to hear what occupying the arts would really look like. I expected the article to end with such a list of ideas. DO tell. My daughters' years of dance training won't mean anything if there isn't an audience to watch them. I'm with you. Show me how...

  11. Dear Anonymous: Please see my next post "On Strike Against New York City Ballet" and the comments attached to it for the beginnings of a discussion on what might be done.
    If you or anyone would like to join a group to press for change on this issue, please email me: flipsy23@gmail.com. I've got a few ideas but don't want to make all of them public at this time. Thanks!