Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] t1_jcpas3o wrote

It sucks, but it's worth it for them to finally cut ties with this one. There are always more world-class sopranos waiting in the wings. Every performer should keep this in mind.

39

Diva2themax t1_jcs44jc wrote

She disappointed me so much with her antics over lockdown & then this. I'm glad I saw her live several times honestly the voice is gorgeous & she is really great in the right role. But so long Anna! She acted like a petulant brat over this & her trashy husband is no better. Glad we're rid of him too.

7

Shortthelongs t1_jcpwii6 wrote

Why, because she's Russian?

"Netrebko had endorsed Putin for president in 2012, but denounced the war in February and later distanced herself from Putin. Her statements led her to be ousted from her Russian contracts and called a traitor."

−21

[deleted] t1_jcq301q wrote

There's a lot more to it than these two sentences. She has close ties to Vladimir Putin and her denouncement of the war was a single statement amid a sea of others that were pro-Putin on her social media. Even her denouncement last February was halfhearted and with plenty of "buts".

From the NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/22/arts/music/anna-netrebko-opera-putin-russia.html

The Met has been trying to deal with her for a while. Since the annexation of Crimea and when the war was limited to Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk, she has been very vocal on her social media in support of the separatists and Vladimir Putin.

The Met made the decision not to engage her during the war because she continues to wholeheartedly support Putin, her Feb. 26 "denouncement" notwithstanding.

It was the right move, albeit expensive. The Met Opera has a bigger budget than any other American nonprofit performing arts organization, and they can't employ outspoken Putin supporters. There are other sopranos.

33

dele7ed OP t1_jcq9jgh wrote

So much for “freedom of speech”… Shall we also put her in jail?

−52

crackhead1 t1_jcqdoyz wrote

Freedom of speech doesn’t guarantee employment at a private institution if they don’t like what you have to say, and what you represent. No one is arresting her for expressing her views.

47

dele7ed OP t1_jcqj03j wrote

Your counter argument is good, the trend is a shitty one though. Canceling people’s contracts based on their views and not professional performance is a straight way to… becoming Putin’s Russia in no time.

−41

[deleted] t1_jcqrzto wrote

No it's not. Have you ever had a job?

32

dele7ed OP t1_jcqvd2z wrote

In the last 25 years I had more jobs than number of days since you signed up here on Reddit.

−39

Important-Ad1871 t1_jcr6w48 wrote

You’ve had 90 jobs in 25 years?

That’s a new one every quarter, you must be a terrible employee

28

dele7ed OP t1_jcry252 wrote

As a carpenter I finished more than a hundred jobs in the time period. What about you, sir? Have you done even one day of physical labor, Mr. Important?

−10

Jintoboy t1_jcrljnb wrote

I mean let's say you post a screed on Facebook or rant on Twitter regarding how bad your employer is, and how no vendor or customer in their right mind should work with them.

Do you think that would go over well? Do you think that won't result in termination or disciplinary action in most cases?

9

tuberosum t1_jctkgd1 wrote

> Canceling people’s contracts based on their views and not professional performance is a straight way to… becoming Putin’s Russia in no time.

Considering that NYS, along with many states in the US, has been an at will employment state where you could be fired for any reason whatsoever at any time (barring protected classes, of which political preference isn't one), we've long since crossed the Rubicon on being like Putin's Russia by your logic.

To put it simply, your employer can fire you for wearing the wrong color T-shirt or because they don't like the buckle on your belt if they so want to.

3

112-411 t1_jd6jl41 wrote

Freedom of speech refers to the first amendment of the United States Constitution. It’s one sentence. I suggest you read it.

1

_Maxolotl t1_jcrayjt wrote

Well I guess from now on, they're gonna have a clause in their contracts that says it's void if you openly support a genocidal autocrat.

25

Manonemo t1_jd0bx04 wrote

I dont know which country you are from, but in USA there is main legal base called Constitution. It says something about "Freedom of speech". (Yeah its joke, I know). Then there is also clause about not discriminating (sex, religion, ethnicity, political affiliation) but thats also joke.

The funnyness of it all is underlined by Usa just in past decades openly invading several other countries, that are in such a heavenly shape after USA delivered democracy and freedom.

If anyone can explain a difference between usa delivered freedom and Putin delivered freedom, cause as far I can say that Putin invaded only one country in decades, while Bush invaded several in several years. Is anyone fired for having pictures taken with him at his preinvasion times anywhere in the world???

−7

BigBlueNY t1_jd13nfr wrote

Political affiliation isn't protected under the Constitution.

3

Manonemo t1_jd1fe6p wrote

You are correct. Only gov employees have that benefit. Everyone else is free game to be discriminated. My bad. To my defense, once upon a time I believed Usa to be better than average totalitarian regime. The thinking, intelligent people knows thats not the case.

0

midtownguy70 t1_jdbs53u wrote

What are you some kind of Putin lover? Fuck Russia.

1

Manonemo t1_jdclhtw wrote

😆 so if someone isnt hater like you - then its Putin lover? 🤣🤣🤣 you are having exact Russian communist mentality. It will be really hard for you to grasp that there are peopke around who have brain. Like I dont have to like Rusdia or agree with it but I dont have to be mentally challenge insecure primitive that lash out on everyone around just because they are from some country. 🙄... I know, I know.. beyond your grasp ..

1

[deleted] t1_jdczre7 wrote

[removed]

1

[deleted] t1_jdd0suk wrote

[removed]

0

midtownguy70 t1_jdd1t39 wrote

Two wrongs don't make a right. I was against invading Iraq too. And I can also be against Russia. It doesn't have any contradiction with my opinion of maniac Putin and the disgusting Russians who still support him. Again, fuck Russia. It's a filthy backward dictatorship that should be crushed like a giant roach.

1

Manonemo t1_jdd7aaz wrote

So were you lynching every American because of that? Nah. You just lash out at successful opera singer and everyone who refuse to be same troll.

1

drpvn t1_jcqz1k0 wrote

Wow this sub is dead lately. Did one of the mods blow it up or something?

15

dboggny t1_jcqj36y wrote

I used to support the Met but haven’t in a long time for a few reasons. In this instance they cut ties with her, Gergiev and and finally Levine. Yet, they can’t afford to do it completely. They still play their music on SeriusXM all the time, especially Levine. Ditto on their own streaming platform. So they will banish you for your beliefs but still make money off of you while we can. IMO what Levine did was much worse and it was the worst kept secret in NYC since the 70s.

6

[deleted] t1_jcqtshr wrote

If they removed the Levine recordings from the archive, there wouldn't be much left. He conducted there from 1971-2017.

11

_Maxolotl t1_jcrb7vj wrote

But he's dead. So he doesn't get the money. Are his heirs terrible also?

5

dboggny t1_jcupfuq wrote

Who’s dead?

1

_Maxolotl t1_jcuyju1 wrote

Isn't Levine dead?

1

dboggny t1_jcv107t wrote

Yes you’re right. He died in 21?

1

_Maxolotl t1_jcv9nfv wrote

I was pretty sure but for a moment I thought you might be talking about a different Levine. Anyway, as long as his heirs aren't also quite terrible I see no problem with the Met and his heirs making money off stuff his estate has a stake in.

2

dboggny t1_jcqu0pn wrote

You are correct. But listen, you’re in for penny, you’re in for a pound. They are nothing more than BS virtue signalers.

−10

dennismullen12 t1_jcqtx99 wrote

So she has the right to support Putin but the fine of $30k for posting an inappropriate comment was ok? Seems like a disconnect.

3

Jimmy_kong253 t1_jcxd7o6 wrote

Well I don't agree with her views asking someone to denounce someone they have publicly supported for a paycheck just seems like covering a hole in the wall with printer paper.

1