Post-Trump purge, can the Kennedy Center save itself? How Mark Morris showed the way
The takeover resulted in the firing of the center's long-serving president, Deborah Rutter, one of the country's most impressive arts leaders. Over the last decade, she expanded an already vast institution's offerings. The center's new temporary president, Richard Grenell, a former ambassador to Germany, lacks arts management experience.
In the meantime, the new administrators warn that the Kennedy Center is impoverished, that the facility has become shoddy and that some of its programming ill serves the American ideal. Diversity and drag are out, which has led to the disinviting of, among others, the Gay Men's Chorus of Washington, D.C., from performing on the premises. Celebrating Christmas, promises Grenell, is very much in, as will be striving for profit-making programming. One suggestion is commercializing the center to take advantage of its real estate value and prime location on the Potomac.
On a recent afternoon I wandered the Kennedy Center's grand hallways leading to an opera house (home of Washington National Opera), concert hall (home to the National Symphony) and the Eisenhower Theater (suited for drama and dance), all overseen by a super-sized bust of JFK. I visited the galleries and shops and restaurants, the Millennium Stage (where a free chamber music performance was taking place) and checked out a recent addition, the Reach, a $250-million complex of flexible venues, an investment the new administration bemoans.
It was a beautiful spring day, and the Kennedy Center appeared to be well-tended but unusually quiet. Other than a small crowd listening to members of the National Symphony perform chamber music, I felt like I had the building practically to myself. A clerk in one of the gift shops was thrilled to finally have a customer. I was the only one in the galleries. Exhibits still reflected diversity. Rainbow flag Kennedy Center T-shirts remained for sale.
There have been cancellations in protest of the takeover — notably Rhiannon Giddens, the Broadway production of 'Hamilton' and what was to have been the Washington premiere of Gregory Spears' moving opera 'Fellow Travelers,' based on the Lavender Scare, the 1950s federal persecution of gay men and lesbians in government. But Mark Morris' potentially controversial new ballet, 'Moon,' was having its world premiere that evening as planned.
Morris may be America's leading choreographer, but he also can be a fanciful bad boy of dance. Tell him he can't do something and, I've been told, look out. It would be hard to imagine the current Kennedy Center welcoming Morris' manner of dispensing Christmas cheer. His brilliant yuletime hit, 'The Hard Nut,' based on Tchaikovsky's 'The Nutcracker,' has been delighting audiences of all ages for three decades, but it does happen to include a comedic maid in drag.
When the Kennedy Center last fall commissioned Morris to make an evening-length centerpiece for its vast 'Earth to Space: Arts Breaking the Sky' festival, nothing more was intended than to honor JFK's initiative that led, in 1969, to Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin being the first Earthlings to walk on the moon. The festival is an exuberant example of the sweeping events that Rutter created. It includes concerts, opera, dance, film, talks, installations, exhibits, interstellar musical journeys of one oddball sort or another, appearances by astronauts and space-specialist celebrities, not to mention daily screenings of a new film, 'The Moonwalkers,' featuring Tom Hanks.
All of this takes on new meaning, especially if we recall JFK's 1962 speech at Rice University in Houston. In it he defended the enormity of the Apollo 11 mission's expense by noting, 'There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space as yet,' and warned that 'its opportunity for peaceful cooperation may never come again.'
NASA is preparing for a moon landing again in 2027. The temptation, this time, goes beyond scientific curiosity to colonization, mining rare elements and using the moon as a waystation to Mars. The two most zealous space buffs on Earth loom large in Washington, with Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk in a moon race with their respective rocket enterprises, Blue Origin and Space X.
Enter Mark Morris. He had been cagey all along about what he had in mind, other than to include the moon landing and the Golden Record, the disc that astronomer and media personality Carl Sagan made for Voyager 1 and 2. Launched in 1977, these two NASA spacecraft were the first intended to leave our solar system. The recording includes sounds, voices and music of the Earth's peoples, in hopes that it just might reach intelligent life somewhere out there.
'Moon,' which is a series of short dances that lasts just under an hour, begins with an animated display of five-pointed stars in a semicircle on a screen that served as the backdrop for the Eisenhower stage. The stars slyly become the circumference of the U.S. presidential seal. But rather than leading to outrage, an image of JFK appeared beneath the seal, and then one of the moon. The audience laughed and then warmly applauded.
Morris' silvery moon was a place of mystery and wonder. Musical choices were agreeably eccentric. Beyond the Golden Record's greetings in many languages to aliens, Morris turned to gloriously schmaltzy swing, bluegrass and country recordings from the '30s, '40s and '50s. These included Al Bowlly's 'Roll Along, Prairie Moon,' Bill Monroe's 'Blue Moon of Kentucky,' Bonnie Guitar's 'Dark Moon' and Hildegarde's 'Honey-Coloured Moon.' Pianist and organist Colin Fowler, joined by bassist Jordan Frazier, added their contributions from the pit. A few of György Ligeti's startlingly strange solo piano numbers from 'Musica Ricercata' showed up. Dancers rolled by on wheeled stools like little space people to some of Marcel Dupré's eerie '24 Organ Inventions.'
With gorgeously impressionist lighting (by Mike Faba), intriguing outer space projections (by Wendall K. Harrington), elegant costumes (by Isaac Mizrahi) and little toy spacemen scattered about, the Morris 'Moon' became a luxuriant dreamlike escape from Washingtonian reality. Most important of all, his company had never been better, and the dancers themselves provided the real fantasy. Otherworldly movement somehow matched the different music in ways that seem rational but not needing to make sense. Movement, itself, was adventure, around every turn an imaginative new surprise.
To walk into a newly uncertain Kennedy Center can feel fraught. But in his program note, Morris asks us to 'observe and enjoy Moon and Space, without understanding a thing.' The genius of 'Moon,' however, is to remind us that wonder can be around the least expected corners.
Can 'Moon' remind NASA to go to the moon to wonder, not to plunder? Probably not. But it can remind artists that if 'Moon' matters, so still must a Kennedy Center that nourishes and produces such work.
Following the three Kennedy Center performances, 'Moon' will be visible in the next seasons over parts of America, including Southern California, where Morris has a large following and favored status in many venues. (The head of the Broad Stage in Santa Monica came to D.C. for the premiere.) In the meantime, Morris' 'Pepperland' reaches the Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts in Beverly Hills next month and the Music Center Plaza in downtown L.A. is offering daily two-minute afternoon breathing and Morris-choreographed movement 'microbreaks,' meant to help us 'pause, reflect and recharge.'
Kennedy Center, please, before it is too late, pause, reflect and recharge. America needs you. And you, if you decide to understand a thing or two, will need us.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
42 minutes ago
- Newsweek
What US Arms Export Review Means for Its Allies
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The United States is reviewing the sending of military gear not just to Ukraine, but to countries across the world, the Pentagon has said, a fresh doubling down on the Trump administration's "America First" agenda, which appears to focus more on U.S. aid rather than lucrative arms deals. However, the move highlights the strain exerted even on the world's largest defense exporter, as demand for military hardware in key areas, such as air defense and artillery, far outstrips supply, analysts say. The U.S.'s vast military-industrial complex accounted for 43 percent of global arms exports between 2020 and 2024, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said in March. But with the global uptick in demand for equipment, "there's too little to go around," said Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at the Belgian think tank, Bruegel. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty/AP The Pentagon review is a prudent stock-take, and one a long time coming for certain types of missiles and munitions, said Ed Arnold, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute think tank. Yet it does pile pressure on countries actively at war in receipt of U.S. supplies, and could prompt swathes of Europe, which have not yet established their own production lines to pump out enough defense gear, to sit up a little straighter. "We can't give weapons to everybody all around the world," the Department of Defense's chief spokesperson, Sean Parnell, said on Wednesday. "We have to look out for America and defending our homeland," he told reporters. Ukraine Taken By Surprise Ukraine is the country most obviously impacted, and the Pentagon has not yet confirmed whether the U.S. has paused weapons shipments to other countries, according to The New York Times. Although Kyiv is no longer as reliant on the United States as it was during the early stages of the war with Russia, U.S. donations continue to be important. The U.S. has provided about $67 billion in military aid to Ukraine since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of its neighbor in February 2022, the State Department said in March. Officials on Tuesday confirmed that the U.S. was holding back deliveries of military supplies to Ukraine after reports indicated that an evaluation of American munitions stockpiles had raised concerns over shortages. Kyiv's Defense Ministry publicly said it had not been officially told by the U.S. that deliveries of military aid would be stopped, and had "requested a telephone conversation" with American officials. "We're always assessing our munitions and where we're sending them," Parnell said, adding that under the Biden administration, the U.S. was "giving away weapons and munitions without really thinking about how many we have." Parnell said that the Pentagon would not provide any updates on the quantity or types of military supplies to Ukraine, nor any timelines for delivery. The delayed weapons reportedly include rounds for 155 mm howitzers, more than 100 Hellfire missiles and precision-guided rounds known as GMLRS, as well as dozens of Patriot missiles. Air defense missiles, in particular the expensive interceptors for the vaunted U.S.-made Patriot systems, have always been at the top of Kyiv's wish list. Ukrainian officials and analysts told Newsweek on Wednesday they were above all concerned about supplies of Patriot missiles. While U.S. shelves are likely still brimming with equipment, the air defense missiles and artillery ammunition that have dominated aid packages will be running in shorter supply, said Pieter Wezeman, a senior researcher in SIPRI's arms transfers team. It is also a question of how full U.S. planners believe their shelves should be, Wezeman told Newsweek. There has always been an understanding that the U.S. is "thin" on Patriot supplies, former Pentagon official Jim Townsend told Newsweek on Wednesday. However, for Ukraine, there's "no alternative" against Russia's advanced ballistic missiles, Lesia Orobets, a former Ukrainian lawmaker deeply involved in Ukraine's air defense, told Newsweek. Observers say Ukraine must now turn to its own industry, further boosting its ability to produce equipment, as well as rely on European partners who have supported Kyiv for years. "Currently, Ukraine can compensate the lack of the U.S. supply by European sources," said Andrii Ziuz, a former chief executive of Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council and current head of technology at London-based company Prevail. Europe Facing 'Real Constraints' Europe itself is at a major evaluation point. The Pentagon's wording is ambiguous, and the review is unlikely to target the foreign military sales that keep America's industry afloat, experts say. However, the U.S. feeling the bite of shortages would not be a good sign for the rest of NATO. Countries on the continent have been major customers of U.S. weapons and platforms for decades. Patriot, and more importantly, its interceptor missiles, are in high demand in Europe as well, Arnold said. "This is going to put a real constraints on European air defense requirements," Arnold told Newsweek. Senior Trump officials had pushed for European NATO members and Canada to dedicate 5 percent of their GDP to defense, a target that had seemed entirely unrealistic until the alliance pledged to meet this threshold in the coming years at NATO's summit last week. Separately, the European Commission, the European Union's executive arm, announced in early March that it would mobilize €800 billion, or roughly $900 billion, in defense funding for member states under a plan dubbed "ReArm Europe." It's a "nearly historical re-armament," said Kirkegaard. The U.S. has also been quite clear that it expects Europe and Canada to continue purchasing American weapons, while still investing in their own defense. This was greeted with somewhat mixed reactions from Europe, although there is a broad consensus that U.S. exports to the continent will dip as Europe builds up its own industries. "It's very clear that the U.S. exports will go down very significantly," Kirkegaard said. However, expanding industrial capacity in Europe is still in the early stages and may be unable to meet demand within the timeframe when key capabilities, such as air defense, could be needed. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said last week that the alliance will invest in a "five-fold increase" in air defense capabilities, as well as "thousands more tanks and armoured vehicles" and millions of artillery rounds. "Europe and Ukraine needs to double—or triple down—not only on domestic production in Ukraine, but very much on improving air defense capability across Europe and in a way that is not dependent on the United States," Kirkegaard said. Israel as 'Top Priority' Patriot missiles, among other types of American-made equipment, are also very much sought after in Israel, particularly after waves of Iranian ballistic missile strikes during what has been termed the "12 day war" last month. Israel also utilizes other systems, such as the American Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) batteries, to intercept ballistic missiles. The U.S. is far more involved in Israel's air defense compared to Ukraine. U.S. troops have repeatedly been involved in shooting down Iranian missiles heading for Israel, and the Trump administration has been far more staunchly supportive of Israel compared to Ukraine. "It's very clear that Israel is the top priority for critical U.S. military supplies of high-end air defense," said Kirkegaard. Israel also has a very strong domestic industry, a major exporter in its own right. Israel's Defense Ministry said last month that it had increased its defense exports for a fourth consecutive year in 2024, with significant jumps in sales to Europe. There was "significant growth" in contracts signed off with European nations, which accounted for 54 percent of the deals closed last year, Israel said in early June. This figure stood at 35 percent in 2023, according to the Israeli government. Missiles, rockets and air defense systems accounted for almost half of all deals, a surge from 36 percent in the previous year, the defense ministry said. Yet Israel, too, needs to build up its stocks of ballistic missile interceptors, Kirkegaard said. "Everyone needs to produce more of these things because of the scale of the ballistic threats," he said. While Iran and Russia have fired high numbers of ballistic missiles at Israel and Ukraine, North Korea has sent its own ballistic missiles for battlefield use and testing by Russian forces. Pyongyang's missiles have since become far more accurate, according to Ukrainian intelligence.
NBC Sports
an hour ago
- NBC Sports
Final big, beautiful bill includes ugly provision for gamblers
Professional gamblers may need to find a new profession. The final version of the big, beautiful bill that will be signed into law by President Trump on Friday contains the tax provision that limits deductions for losses to 90 percent. It has caused widespread consternation among those who make their living by gambling. And by those who make their living by getting people to gamble. Representative Dina Titus (D-Nevada), whose district includes Las Vegas, believes that the new law will nudge people away from legal gambling to illegal operations. 'It pushes people into the black market if they don't do regulated gaming because they have a tax disadvantage,' Titus said on News Nation. 'The black market doesn't pay taxes, isn't regulated, doesn't help with problem gaming, so it's bad for the industry, as well as for the player.' Titus may be introducing legislation to change the law back to the way it was. While the gambling industry would seem to benefit from scaring away those who consistently beat the house, not every professional gambler takes away more money than they lose. By wiping out all or most of them, the gambling industry loses the opportunity to take the money of the professional gamblers who lose more than they win. So, yes, it will push gamblers to a system of gambling that doesn't report wins and losses to the IRS. That said, anyone who has read all or (like me) most of Losing Big knows that the legal gambling industry in America isn't really doing enough to prevent problem gambling before problems arise. By potentially wiping out professional gambling, the purveyors of odds and not-breaking0evens will have even less incentive to come up with ways to keep people from pumping more money into the business than they should. This is, frankly, one of the specific consequences of a bill that overwhelms the system to the point where the specific problems can't be identified until it's too late. And it's a primary facet of the current administration: There's always something else that's happening to prevent a proper counter to the things that have already happened. Basically, they've come up with a way to game the political system. And it could be taking a chunk out of the American gaming industry. For those gamblers who didn't vote for the current administration, we're sorry. For those gamblers who did, what's that saying about elections and consequences?
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Independence Vs. Interdependence: What Great Leaders Understand
Our independence emerges from our interdependence On July 4th, the United States celebrates the spirit of independence, an ideal that has shaped not only nations but also our assumptions about leadership. Independence signals strength, self-sufficiency, and conviction. Yet in the biology of behavior, no organism thrives in isolation for long. Just as ecosystems depend on the dynamic interplay among species, effective leadership depends on a balance between independence and interdependence. When leaders over-index on autonomy and under-invest in connection, even their independence becomes fragile. The Evolutionary Appeal of Independence Humans are wired to protect autonomy. From an evolutionary perspective, self-reliance was adaptive because it allowed individuals to secure resources, defend territory, and reduce vulnerability. In modern workplaces, this drive often shows up as leaders proving their competence by trying to do everything themselves. Research in evolutionary biology suggests that signaling independence can elevate perceived status and credibility. The same studies reveal that overemphasis on autonomy can also erode trust and weaken the collective strength that groups need to adapt in complex environments. Interdependence Is in Our Nature We are built for connection. Our brains are built for connection. Social bonding is not a nice-to-have; it is a biological imperative. Oxytocin, sometimes called the 'trust hormone,' facilitates cooperation and buffers stress. In primate groups, reciprocal grooming does more than maintain hygiene. It reinforces alliances that determine survival. Neuroscientist Matthew Lieberman describes the human brain as a social organ, always attuned to belonging and shared purpose. Interdependence is not a compromise of independence. It is the context that sustains it. Evidence from Harvard Business Review has shown that teams grounded in mutual reliance outperform those built on rigid individualism, especially in unpredictable conditions. The Hidden Costs of Overvaluing Independence Leaders who idolize independence often create cultures of hidden struggle and quiet disengagement. When people feel they must prove self-sufficiency, they hesitate to ask for help or share early ideas. Over time, this erodes psychological safety and constrains innovation. Neuroscience demonstrates that social isolation elevates cortisol, the primary stress hormone. Elevated cortisol impairs decision-making and emotional regulation, especially under pressure. Teams that lack interdependence are more reactive, less resilient, and prone to burnout. Leaders who ignore this dynamic often find themselves working harder while their impact diminishes. Balancing Independence and Interdependence Through Behavioral Signals This is where the biology of behavior meets the art of leadership. In my work on Leadership Biodynamics, I help leaders become intentional about the signals they send. Warmth, competence, and gravitas are not fixed traits. They are perceivable behaviors that can be adjusted to match the moment. When leaders demonstrate warmth by listening with intention, validating others, and creating shared purpose, they signal safety. Competence emerges through clear priorities and steady execution. Gravitas, which I define as the ability to bring people together to create shared value, stabilizes uncertainty without suppressing others' autonomy. These signals create cultures where independence and interdependence support each other. They also allow leaders to develop a repertoire of behaviors, refined over time, as I explored in an article on why repetition improves performance. Cultivating Cultures of Adaptive Interdependence Leaders who want to build adaptive interdependence can start with a few practical shifts. First, model help-seeking. When leaders openly ask for input, they show that collaboration is a strength, not a weakness. Second, reward reciprocity. Recognize and celebrate those who support others and share credit generously. Third, design rituals that reinforce shared identity. Simple practices, such as reflecting together after a project or discussing lessons learned, strengthen the sense that progress is a collective effort. Research on organizational behavior and collaboration shows that these micro-practices compound over time. They build cultures of trust, adaptability, and sustainable impact. Why Interdependence Makes Independence Sustainable Independence deserves celebration. It fuels conviction, courage, and creative risk-taking. Yet without interdependence, it withers under the weight of complexity. The most resilient leaders understand that our biology evolved for mutual reliance. They do not trade independence for interdependence. They integrate them, shaping environments where people feel safe enough to stand alone and strong enough to stand together. In leadership, as in nature, connection is not a concession. It is the foundation of durable impact.
