JIM FLETCHER

Now that I've sent out the notice about the Milwaukee Theatre awards, I want to respond to this whole idea. I've been very vocal about my opposition to this, but was asked to let things be until the idea was further explored. Clearly this idea is being pushed forward without any public debate, so here goes:

About a year ago I posted my reasons on the Bunny Gumbo Forum for opposing an awards ceremony for theatre in Milwaukee. The posting arose from a conversation I had with several people in Chicago when I went down to see The Adding Machine. The posting was all theory as we don’t actually have an awards ceremony here. Well that theory is about to become a reality as the idea is being actively put forward, perhaps as early as next year. I want to revisit my arguments against such an awards ceremony as I’ve had more time to dwell on the subject and may be able to do so with less venom.

At the heart of it, I can see very little good coming from such awards, and the very real possibility of much damage. By its very nature, an awards ceremony will bring accolades to the very few and resentment from the great masses. It sets up a star system which doesn’t exist here as of yet. I strongly believe in ensemble acting and that a show is no better than its weakest link, or perhaps a better way of saying that is a show is no better than it's smallest part and the actors that often play those small parts so well.. I understand that there are leads in plays, but no good playwright has ever put a single character in a play, no matter how small, that wasn’t vital to the story. Those parts will be ignored. You might argue that there will be an ensemble award, which is nice for one play.

But before we get to that, there are many problems to be considered just within the nominating process itself. Who gets nominated? I’m extremely happy for those Milwaukee actors who have found a home here in Milwaukee, whether it be at the Rep, First Stage, Skylight, Milwaukee Chamber Theatre, Next Act or wherever. Those jobs are hard to come by. The vast majority of us are trying to piecemeal careers together getting work where we can. The point being that some actors are getting a ton of stage time in plumb roles, the roles which will get nominated, while the vast majority won’t get that chance. Why would we want to install a system that rewards this?

What would the categories be? Supposedly best actor and actress, best supporting roles and best ensemble. Now I suppose we should stretch that to include categories in both drama and comedy. We certainly must have musical in there as well. In a truly ensemble play, who will determine which roles are to be nominated for leads and which for support? What about Children's Theatre? First Stage is one of the largest and most respected theatres of that kind in the nation, and it already often gets reduced to secondary status. They employ a hell of a lot of people. Do we ignore that or create a special category? Where does it end?

And who will these nominators be? They can’t be the critics. I’ve been over that argument before and will be happy to do so again. It can’t be the paying audience. There’s just no way to level out the playing field with some theatres having large seating capacities and long runs. Actors? How would that happen? There is an inherent conflict of interest there. Just as I don’t think an actor should ever be able to be a critic, nor do I think we should be judging each other publicly for awards. Would we be able to vote for ourselves? Who could resist voting for friends or against those we don’t like? Who are these people who are so unbiased as to be fair?

The idea was put forward to me that it should be a committee. I asked who this committee would be made up of and was given no firm answer. It appears that one can apply for the job. I then asked if the committee would be required to see every show in the season and I was told that hopefully that would happen. Hopefully.

I’ll put that aside for now. My next question was what actors would be up for nomination? In other words, was there a have and have-not level as far as theatres or contracts are concerned? Indeed there is. If a theatre offered at least one Equity contract in a season its shows would be up for nomination. Shows which fell outside of this limitation would be up for citations, which already sounds like a punishment. So for instance, Dan Katula got an Equity contract for Losers which means my whole season would be up for nomination. That was an ensemble play if ever there was one, but unless Dan was in the play, the fine work that we got from Allison, Robert, Doug and Toni would go unrewarded. And who said Equity is the end-all and be-all of determining an actor’s worth? There are a lot of cons to turning Equity and I know a lot of actors that happily forgo joining the union. So will we have smaller theatres trying to stretch their budgets to get that one Equity contract in order to be eligible? If such things interested me I might be so inclined.

And who votes on these people once they are nominated? I was told that voting would be within the disciple, so actors would vote on actors, directors on directors, costumers on costumers and so on. But do non-equity actors get a say on the equity actors? Do all actors get to vote? And once again, how do you avoid the old boys club of voting? And just what is this boundary of Milwaukee? Do I have to actually live within the city limits to be eligible? Do I need to present a driver's license or will a simple utility bill in my name suffice? What about all of the fine actors that come in for one or two shows a year but live elsewhere?

But further, what good do these awards do? Let’s say my theatre company wins an award for best play of 2009. Besides getting a plaque to hang up somewhere obscure because I don’t own my own theatre, what am I going to do with this accolade? Put out a press release? With what money? Put that info on my next mailing, which will be a completely different show than the one which won the award? How about as an actor? Let’s say I win an acting award, how do I put that to use? Am I actually going to get a job as a result of winning The Lunt/Fontaine award for Best Supporting Actor in a Drama? Is anyone that shallow?

At the crux of all of this I asked why we need such an awards ceremony? The answer that was given me was that we need a reason to get together as a community. I agree, I try to do that on a daily basis, but we don’t need something as divisive as an awards ceremony to produce such a gathering. We need a party where everyone is included. I’d much rather spend $20 for a bunch of booze and to hear my friends doing bad karaoke and silly skits than sit in a dark room watching a few people getting awards.

I’ve flat out stated that I will never take part in such an awards ceremony, but I’m all about getting people together. Perhaps you feel differently and if so, I’d love to hear your take, but I must say that the vast majority of people I've talked to about this idea have been vehement in their opposition to it. This idea is out there and moving, so if you have any thoughts about it I urge you to voice your opinion. Take care.

Fletcher

UPDATE 6/8

Here are my most recent thoughts on all of this. Awards ceremonies are in place in many other cities. I don't care and I don't find that a valid argument for having them here. This is not New York, this is not Chicago and it's not even Minneapolis. Pointing out that theatre is a competitive business by nature doesn't matter to me either. Yes, I know that, but I don't need to contribute to making it more so. I would like to have a city where things could be better and in my own small way I will try to do so. If an awards ceremony will make anything better, I would like those in favor of it to present the rest of us with the data proving that it will do just that. It is my personal belief that an awards ceremony, however well intended, will make things worse. I oppose such a thing and I will make my opinion known. You should make your opinion known as well. To push this forward without everyone weighing in is folly.