Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | D | Dance Magazine

Baby boom: more dancers--and artistic directors--are accepting pregnancy as part of life.

Article Excerpt
After Royal Ballet principal Darcey Bussell had her first child in 2001, a London critic wrote, "Dancers who have had large families don't stay at the peak of their profession ... If Bussell ever wanted to be a mother of four, she would certainly have to kiss her ambitions goodbye." Last winter, those words still stung, but not enough to deter Bussell. She was 34, pregnant again, and intent on returning to the stage. "I don't feel that old," she said.

American Ballet Theatre's Julie Kent, also 34, is expecting her first child this month and plans to be back in costume by fall. "I feel so blessed to be able to have this experience, and at the same time continue doing something I have such a passion for," said Kent.

Fifteen years ago, most ballerinas retired when they wanted children, bowing to the still-persistent notion that a career in dance and motherhood are so much oil and water. Even choreographers aren't immune. Consider this remark from an online review of Julia Adam's Angelo for San Francisco Ballet in 2002: "Adam came out on stage, very pregnant, which could explain why this piece wasn't up to her usual level of craftsmanship. With all those extra hormones churning around it's hard to concentrate." Ouch. Did another woman actually write that?)

This generation, however, isn't buying it--even at 35 or older. Bussell is one of five career mothers at The Royal Ballet. Houston Ballet has six, San Francisco Ballet has five, and ABT has three. (This doesn't count dancing dads; some companies claim a few of those, too.)

So who's to thank for family life's new toehold in ballet? For starters, there's a practical answer: The American Guild of Musical Artists didn't add a maternity clause to its contracts until 1990. Today's thirty-something ballet dancers at least with major companies are the first generation who grew up knowing they wouldn't lose their jobs after a pregnancy leave.

Although history yields a few stellar exceptions (beginning with Marie Taglioni and Carlotta Grisi in the ninetheenth century), most ballerinas saw motherhood as a career handicap. "No babies, no husbands, no boyfriends," said Patricia Neary, a New York City Ballet soloist of the 1960s. This unwritten rule was understood by almost everyone who danced for George Balanchine, she said. "He was very possessive, and he wanted all of his girls to dance."

Melissa Hayden, former New York City Ballet principal, said she thinks Balanchine just didn't want to be inconvenienced. She, Karin yon Aroldingen, and Allegra Kent managed to stay with NYCB after having children....

View this article FREE - Now for a Limited Time, try Goliath Business News
Free for 3 Days!