The Kremlin press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, explained that the president has not chosen a new leader for the Bolshoi Theatre. He noted that the appointment did not come from the president and that several governance options for Russia’s major performing arts venues had been discussed in different venues and meetings, including those that involved high-level participation by the president. As of now, no final decision has been made.
Peskov added that a ruling on the matter could still be issued before the year ends, but the Kremlin tends not to publicize such decisions in advance. He emphasized that official announcements of this nature are not released publicly ahead of time, reflecting the careful approach taken in coordinating changes at national cultural institutions.
Earlier, Valery Gergiev, who serves as conductor, artistic director, and general director of the Mariinsky Theatre, responded to the reports about potentially taking the helm at the Bolshoi Theatre. He indicated that he was not seeking additional professional opportunities at the moment. The public discourse around his possible leadership at the Bolshoi drew attention to the prospect of a combined leadership arrangement between Russia’s two historic ensembles, as media outlets began discussing the viability of such a merger.
On November 15, Izvestia reported, citing multiple sources, that Gergiev had written of his potential new role at the Great Theatre. The article suggested that he would oversee both the Bolshoi and Mariinsky engagements. As of that reporting, no official appointment had been announced. The narrative suggested that Vladimir Urin, who has led the Bolshoi since 2013, might depart from the post, with the new leadership intended to assume responsibilities following Urin’s voluntary exit.
The discussions around a possible consolidation of the Bolshoi and Mariinsky theatres were framed as a strategic shift for Russia’s flagship cultural institutions. Analysts noted that such a move would bring together two storied cultural brands under a single leadership framework, potentially influencing programming, international collaborations, and the overall governance of the nation’s premier performing arts venues. Opinions on the proposal spanned a spectrum from cautious optimism about greater artistic coherence to concerns about the risks of concentrating governance in one seat of power. The situation remained fluid, with officials weighing how a merged, dual-venue leadership would operate in practice and whether it would deliver the continuity and prestige expected of Russia’s national theatres.