While in MKE I was an advocate for a local version of the Tony Award. Thought that it would be a good PR vehicle for the local industry and at least one time a year get us some tv time in the form of soft news. Wiser folks prevailed that it was pointless and fraught with politics and hurt feelings.
They were right, I was wrong.
Now outside the snowglobe of MKE theatre, I have to agree. Any industry awards show is primarily engineered as a PR stunt by the producers, using the talent as bait for public attention. But it is the artists that are the catalysts, and as such can get consumed by the process.
In the end, nobody cares who gets the award. It's all just an excuse to pay attention for a brief moment, in the hopes it will drive some business to the box office. Nothing more.
Friday, June 12, 2009
CHRISTOPHER LIBBY
Thursday, June 11, 2009
LINDA STEPHENS
I want to add my thoughts to the idea of having Milwaukee Theatre Awards.
I think I have about 8 or 9 acting awards from 4 different cities.
Not only have they done nothing for me personally in terms of getting the next work, they've actually hurt me sometimes. People think anything from "Oh, she thinks she's better than us", to "Oh, she's too good for us, we could never get her."
But apart from the personal affect of award winning, is the reason they exist in the first place....to bring people into the theatre by making them more aware of the theatre. They're theatre advertisements.
If they succeed in raising awareness in some small way, they also succeed in creating a "caste" system in the community...those who win become "better" which means those who don't win are "not as good." And, audiences can be swayed to believe in the award given, and not their own sensibilities.
I really believe it's an unhealthy proposition for a theatre community as comparatively healthy as this one. To ask the community to compete for awards, will change the nature of what Milwaukee has, which is unique. It is familial -- no it's not one happy family. But, I feel a lot of genuine caring in this theatre community. And, no matter the company, the work here is, at its least, well-crafted, and at its best brilliant.
Milwaukee is already "special." Don't let awards try to "fix" what "ain't broke".
Sunday, June 7, 2009
CHERYL ROLOFF
I've been waiting for the right time to weigh in & I realized as I read Michael's response below that he's thoughts are exactly what I wanted to say. I agree completely down to the annual celebration of all the talent this town has to offer. I'll gladly help serve the punch!! It's actually very similar to what I had said on the Bunny Gumbo message Board when this subject came last year. Feel free to post to everyone, or not. And thanks again for fielding all of these responses!!
DYLAN BOLIN
You know how I enjoy a good debate about theatre. (See the case of Fletch v Dylan Re: The Role of Theater Critics) Having read many of the responses, here is my Swiftian Modest Proposal:
As a perennial fringe player, I have to agree with Jonathon Wainwright’s and Megan Wilkerson’s assessment that the theatre community is very “clique-y.” Sure, this is by necessity; I mean there’s only so much endowment money circulating out there, right? As the economy beats down on Milwaukee’s theatre landscape, and the life-giving income pools begin to shrink, with less and less to go around, it’s natural to yearn for some sort of selection. Perhaps the appropriate conclusion is that, if the competition is becoming fiercer (and to Bryce Lord’s point, there is indeed competition, and to deny it is patently disingenuous), why not make it a production in and of itself by way of an awards ceremony. I say: Go for it!
One result from a good old knuckle and skull Theatre Donnybrook is a shake-up of the status quo. Another will be that of holding a hair dryer over the afore-mentioned, already-shrinking pool (and the further isolation of the already-shrinking, artistic gene pool). The winners will be true local theatre royalty! But, losers don’t despair; while you pull yourselves up by your artistic bootstraps and gird your theatrical loins for the next go round, you’ll have no choice but to stoke the creative fire in your own bellies. It’s win/win!
But I understand that many are squeamish at the thought of competition by way of an awards ceremony. For those who would maintain Community above Competition, I have another proposal: The formation of the Community of Milwaukee Area Theaters, or C.O.M.A.T. Membership is simple: All you need to do to be a Member Theater is agree that every Member Theater will pool their collective profits from endowments, grants, attendance, etc. into a common fund. Likewise, they will pool their common costs. Advertising the other Member Theaters and their upcoming productions within each other’s Playbills is also a rule of membership. At the end of the season, payments and profits of all Member Theaters will be calculated, and monies will be distributed evenly among the members. You won’t find a stronger community than that.
But why pretend that our “community” (quotes by Bryce) is one big, happy family? Why pretend that it’s a Jewish Kibbutz in Repertory? What’s wrong with a little competition? There’s no reason you can’t share a bottle of Merlot, and lift a glass to mutual respect afterwards. And if the proposed award in question is shallow, self-serving and poorly representative of the Milwaukee theatre community, surely it will expose itself as such quickly enough.
What’s wrong with a little entropy? I’m all for revolution, innovation and renewal! Give me visceral passion over status maintenance! What the “winners” will not give, the “losers” will take! That’s the kind of theatre I want to see!
Then again, I’m not your average theater-goer, so take it for what it’s worth.
-Dylan Bolin
KEVIN RICH
When I first heard about these awards, and began to read all of the responses, I came in to the argument on the side of supporting the awards. It seemed to me that their intention is to support the community and that we, in turn, should support them. However, after reading some very good points made on both sides, it is nonetheless apparent that a vast majority is opposed to the awards, and if the majority of a community finds something divisive, then it will be divisive. So now I guess I’m against them, because even if they happen with the best of intentions, they simply won’t have the effect on the community their organizers want them to have, because the community isn’t going to let it.
But that’s an important thing to consider, I think: that perhaps divisiveness happens in the interpretation of a thing, rather than in the action of the thing itself.
Let’s say I went to the expense of throwing a guacamole party, and I asked all of you to bring your own guacamole. And then I asked my mom to pick her three favorites and I gave those three guacamole chefs a wooden avocado that I carved all by myself.
If you were one of the three recipients of my Wooden Avocado, would you:
A. Throw the avocado at me and leave in a rage because I was clearly trying to divide the community
B. Laugh but privately feel good about yourself and sort of want to go make more guacamole
If you were not one of the recipients of my Wooden Avocado, would you:
A. Raise hell and punch me and never make guacamole again
B. Sort of wish you got an avocado, but get on with your life because really, it was just my mom.
I don’t know. I just think that a group of people wanting to spend a lot of time, effort and personal expense to see as much local theatre as possible, weigh in on what they found particularly powerful and important, and lift up members of the community for their artistic contributions sounds really kind, and really supportive. And conversely, people who say they will refuse to let their personal or company’s artistic contributions be considered by said group for said recognitions in the name of Milwaukee being a supportive community – but only in the way they want it to be supportive – sounds, well, less supportive.
I’m reminded of something that is happening on a broader scale in this current economic climate: state and federal funding for gifted programming is being either significantly reduced or completely eliminated in educational systems all across the nation. The argument: it’s not necessary. And further, who are we to say who is “gifted” and who isn’t? Isn’t singling out students for state-funded three-week summer academies for gifted students divisive? But as someone who (God knows why), in high school, was given the one of those opportunities – something I never could have afforded if it wasn’t state funded – I can tell you those three weeks of recognition, of affirmation, of being introduced to and challenged by a truly inspiring community of people, is a privilege I will never forget and a responsibility I will never shirk.
I read an article in Newsweek a few months back about this very issue; it was in the Opinion section, written by the mother of an autistic son and a gifted daughter. In a nutshell, she wrote that while she certainly wouldn’t want any of the specialized care and attention that is given to her son taken away from him, she couldn’t help but feel that if her daughter had the same level of attention- a teacher sitting next to her all day long in a one-on-one situation, constantly inspiring and challenging her, what could she accomplish? What would be her limit? Hell, maybe one say she’d find a cure for autism.
Obviously, arguments on both sides here. But interesting food for thought. Singling people out is always going to be subjective, because other human beings are doing the singling, be they educators, arts organizations, or my mom. But do we give no one an avocado simply because we don’t have enough to give everyone?
Just a thought: if these recognitions were to happen, what if we made them a responsibility? What if the money that the voters spend on tickets were put into a fund that was to be spent by the recipients on some sort of creative contribution to benefit the entire community? Isn’t that really the point of all of this anyway? My mom gave you the avocado because she wants you to make more guacamole!
Okay, I’ve seriously run my metaphor into the ground. I’m going to go get some Mexican food. I love you people. I moved here to be a part of conversations like this. Thanks,
Kevin Rich
MICHAEL WRIGHT
When the idea of local theatre awards was first proposed over a year ago, I listened to a handful of varying opinions. I myself was on the fence about it, but I honestly believed that if the local performing arts community really wanted this sort of recognition, they should be allowed to pursue it.
As I process the long, long list of email responses that have been posted recently, it seems to me that the majority of our performing arts community is not particularly interested in this proposition. Many are vehemently against it.
(By the way, thanks for the perfect network, Fletch! I hope you know what a great, important service you’re providing.)
For what it’s worth, I’m no longer on the fence. I just don’t see the point in adding more competition to an already too competitive world.
By all means, let’s celebrate our fellow artists. Let’s throw an annual party. (We could even give citations for lifetime achievements and special contributions to bettering our community.) Let’s create more opportunities for sharing ideas and resources. Let’s find imaginative ways to collaborate on marketing our work.
But above all, let’s try to give each other as much support and respect as we can muster.
LISA MARIE GATEWOOD
Hey Fletch,
I've had several conversations about this with people in the theatre community, but didn't really feel compelled to get in the ring as I'm not an actor, director, designer, etc. However, I do feel I can add some insight as part of a community with an award system already in place.
Bo drew a parallel between these theatre awards and the WAMI awards in our music community. And I wanted to put my two cents in because I (so very respectfully) disagree with the portrait that was painted of the WAMI's and it's also my fear that the Theatre Awards in Milwaukee WOULD turn out to be like the WAMI's.
The WAMI's divide our community, which is something people who are members don't seem to see. It's a group of people who pay to be a member of this club just to get a little recognition for what they SHOULD be recognized for anyway. It sets a precedent that in order to be publicly recognized for your art in Milwaukee, you have to pay up and join a club. I'm not saying that undeserving people win WAMI's. Quite the contrary, I respect the hell out of all those musicians. But the rest of us who have chosen not to be a member of the WAMI's always seem suspiciously left out. Is this intentional? Probably not--- but that's where I think the nomination process breaks down (and where I think it would inevitably break down with the awards in question). First of all, I don't think anyone on the WAMI board, even having booked me for shows, ever heard my first album. How can we fairly nominate "Best Album" unless they heard every album? Likewise, how could we fairly nominate best performance unless we could ensure that our nominating committee saw every performance? And even then, it's a matter of taste, which is unreliable, at best.
The WAMI's are the one time of the year where a few people get awards which reaffirms that their work matters, and the rest of us roll our eyes and get a beer somewhere else.
Basically, I don't want to see the theatre community turn out like the music community. The WAMI's drew a line in the sand and divided us into "us and them". We are all working hard, we are all pouring our guts out in front of audiences, but so few end up being recognized. I'm not saying I should win an award, I'm just saying that I know people who have recorded some of the most amazing albums I've ever heard (local or otherwise) and have never been nominated.
As a theatre community, I have always felt that we are so wonderfully bonded. I started at Next Act Theatre when I was 17 years old. This community is my family and I don't feel that there is any one person who should be recognized more than anyone else. When I was backstage doing your laundry, you never treated me like I was less a part of the success of the production than the people out on stage or the person who designed the set. We are all cogs in this amazing machine. I guess what it comes down to is that we all work hard, we all make this happen, none of us want to just "phone it in". So, don't we all deserve an award?
If this is only for the purposes of marketing, let's put our heads together and work toward the goal of raising us all up equally.
I have such great respect for all of you... all of us.
Love,
Lisa Marie
KATIE CUMMINGS
Hey Fletch!
This has been a very interesting week in the land of theatre here in Milwaukee. If you want to post my comments, please do so.
As a person who has always been on the fringe of theatre in Milwaukee I didn't feel that my opinion of the awards was valid...so I asked some lay people the other night.
We were out with friends. Both women have seen shows in the Milwaukee area and love it. They are not avid theatre goers, but see shows on occasion when something strikes their fancy. They are not married to one theatre company or another.
I gave them a brief intro on the debate and then posed the following questions.
What would you think of an awards ceremony in Milwaukee that mirrors the Tony's?
"What would be the point?" asked one
The other responded with "Why would we need them?"
I further asked - If you were planning on seeing a show next year, 2010, and the theatre had won the award for Best Show of 09, would it encourage you to see it?
"If there were three shows that I was debating on seeing, I might pick the one that had won an award the year before."
"No, it wouldn't matter, what would matter to me is which show I could afford to see."
The last question I asked: If an actor won Best Female in a Leading Role and she was in a show you knew that you wouldn't want to go see, would you?"
"That's just dumb Katie" and my other friend nodded in agreement.
We promptly got into a discussion about whether or not to have awards in Milwaukee which prompted a question from them: "Who would be making these decisions?" A committee, I responded, or maybe audience members. This last bit prompted the following question: If you saw my name in the Shepard down as one of the best directors in town, knowing that you hadn't seen any of my work, but you knew that it was my name, would you vote for me?
"Of course!! That's how I vote for everything in the Shepard!" And we all shared a good laugh.
I just thought I would share a few comments from the lay person's point of view.
kc
STEVE WHITE
2 questions:
1) Have we lost the ability to say "thank you" when we are complemented?
2) Why does this event need to be thought of as a competition?
Regardless of who makes the decision and what criteria they use, when
one gets the recognition the response can simply be "thank you".
Thank you, Steve White..............
BRYCE LORD
Well this seems to be the week for people to spout off, so here goes…
I have been reading all the posts filling my inbox this past week regarding the awards/recognition project and I must say I’m really frustrated by all this talk of “community. I think we all agree on what we would like our theater community to be, but based on this past week we clearly have a long way to go before we get there.
What kind of “community” do we have where the mere mention of a particular theater company or individual will literally cause a rolling of the eyes out of disdain for the type of work they create?
What kind of “community” do we have where many of the artistic directors in town (and we all know who they are) rarely venture out of their own theaters to see, experience and support our “community”? (I only exclude actors from this same point, because, theoretically, we’re all working and too busy, right?)
What kind of “community” do we have where the mere mention of an idea to develop, support and promote the Milwaukee theater scene, not just within the city – but potentially on a national level, is met with scorn, dismay and downright anger before the particulars are even made public? How about spreading a little of the “Free Speech” we all seem so hot for?
As for the idea that theater is not competitive…talk to two Managing Directors of two companies with large productions opening the same weekend. Talk to every Artistic Director in town who has struggled to come up with a rival to “A Christmas Carol”. I do understand the difference between the ideal art and the real business of theater. We all work very hard to create our version of the world and express ourselves in a way that the public will understand and appreciate. But, honey, as long as you cash that paycheck, it’s a business…and business is competitive.
Nearly every city I’ve lived in has had some sort of annual award/recognition/celebration event to promote theater. Why not Milwaukee? Did it bring about the end of creation? Definitely not. Sure, there will always be the second-guessing of the “winners” brought about by differences of opinions and insecurities. Welcome to the theater.
For myself, I’m on the fence. I see great benefit from the idea and I agree that this is clearly something that must be handled with care and foresight, since the mere rumor has created such a flap. But quite frankly, I’m not sure the Milwaukee theater “community” is grown up enough to truly embrace something like this yet.
Bryce Lord
Saturday, June 6, 2009
MARTI L. GOBEL
The main issue for me, is simply a matter of taste and the definition of it, as it applies to the Milwaukee theater community. If taste is the ability to notice and appreciate art in the form of theater, and, this offering is the result of the talents of one or several people, who gets to judge what the correct taste to have is? This issue has been raised by many of the people who have chimed in. I agree with the concern regarding this issue.
I have gone to a show and walked out of a theater amazed at the offering of the cast, designers and directors. I have then shared my opinion with people who I trust in the Milwaukee theater pool, and, on more than one occasion have been told that my "taste buds" were off. "This" was wrong, or "that" was wrong, according to this person or persons. Such-n-such should have gone one way, or, such-n-such should have gone that way. The same instance has occurred on the flip side. I have gone to a play and been BORED TO TEARS. Again, I have shared my opinion and been told that it was my taste that was off. Blah-blah was brilliant. Doot-da-doo has never done finer work... TASTE, taste, taste... For the record, I think I have pretty good taste. Hahahahahaha.
So, again, I pose the question, whose taste are we trusting when it comes to receiveing awards? Taste is such a personal component of each individual personality. We come to our own ideas of what is good or bad based on many, many things. Our training, our ear, our desire to hear a certain story told, our personal ability to read people, our love of classical or contemporary pieces, the actor "tic" we find annoying, etc. Folks like what they like. Folks don't like what they don't like You get the gist.
In regards to the Milwaukee theater community- Auditions have become, for me, a chance to see my fellow actors, share a hug and kiss, do my thang, share another hug and kiss and go home. I love seeing my colleagues. I also love getting dressed up. If there was a big gathering of all the people in the industry that I have worked with or hope to work with or have seen their offerings AND cocktails will be served. I am there!!!!! I don't need to sit through an awards ceremony to do this. I don't need to be subjected to the results of someone else's "taste buds" to do this.
The reason I do this is simple. I have an insatiable hunger for those moments on stage when I forget about everything except what the story I am telling dictates that I remember. That sweet-ass fall in to the hands of the tale. Supported, of course, by the costumes, the lights, the sound, the set and all of the components that make what is happening on stage real to me...
It has nothing to do with awards and I shun the day that it does...
Marti L. Gobel. Actor.
MICHELLE WAIDE
Thank you for opening up this conversation, which is actually doing some of what we’re in need of—connecting across a wide range of Milwaukee theater experiences—a rare thing, indeed.
I’m not for an award system. Equity vs non-equity, community vs professional—the divisions could and DO abound. Heidi and others touched on this. I can understand the differences between those who make their actual living in theater and those of us who do it as an avocation, but we could do better. For example, the other night some of us participated in a “poetry fundraiser”—an event that brought a variety of local theater performers together . The audience loves these events and I think it’s not just the wonderful poems. It’s the experience of seeing such a mix of actors coming together. No hierarchy, just poetry!
You may share this. “Only connect” E.M. Forster
Michelle Waide
NATHAN STUBER
fletch-
pass along if you wish...
i'll weigh in on the 'non acting' segment of an awards system...
as a designer who still works in milwaukee but has taken up residence elsewhere i would like to point out that while there is certainly a talented pool of theatre artists in milwaukee i can count the number of full time theatrical scenic designers who call milwaukee home on one hand... (i can almost do the same with lighting designers...)
while an awards system (properly instituted... and i am doubtful that it can be...) would showcase the depth of acting talent in milwaukee, it would draw focus to the scale of our community... awards 'work' in chicago and new york because there are tons more fish in the pond.... a ballot of the same three or four designers in each category each year (assuming only milwaukee residents are eligible to be nominated) would feel like the animated features category at the oscars... pixar...and....hmmmm....right...
personally i find publicly claiming one artistic endeavor as being superior to all others distasteful... i know who can act, direct, stage manage, build and design in this town and i'm pretty sure that an awards system would do nothing to confirm or dissuade my personal beliefs or aesthetic....
as for an award as a marketing tool? if Actor X won best actor for a low budget show that no one in the greater community saw, but was awarded upon merit, would anyone seek out said actor the following season? how would you market that? would you as a producer alter your casting to get an 'award winner'? do you go see shows because of one piece of the puzzle? sure, i try and support certain people. but i work in the industry...
anyway... final reason i find awards laughable... julia roberts... best actress? ha...
-nate
SHANNON SLOAN-SPICE
Hi everyone, I am very much on the fringe of this debate, as my focus has been on motherhood and school for some time. Perhaps my fringeness allows for some quiet and hopefully helpful observation.
It seems to me the tensions of this argument can be reconciled and what we have here is a fabulous community who are all trying to protect and honor what makes this city special.
Those of you trying to organize the awards are taking leadership roles in trying to move something forward which will help the dire economic predicament. This is really to be commended.
And those of you against the awards are trying to veer away from exclusivity and any further feelings of rejection, which is an unfortunate and natural part of the business. Both positions are to be applauded. I think this debate only shows how dedicated and caring everyone is here.
I am working on a PhD in Myth and Depth psychology so let me be a little nerdy for a moment and say, there is a sort of actors' mythos emerging here, a wonderful story in itself. It is lovely to see how much you all have come forward, and in knowing, too, we can agree to disagree and still love and respect one another.
C.G. Jung says that if we hold the tension of opposites long enough, the reconciliation emerges which is a synthesis of the thesis and antithesis. Perhaps this issue is so emotional now because it is a sign something wonderful is trying to birth.
I do believe there is away to use this idea for good marketing-we don't need the loss of any more arts organizations like Milwaukee Shakes-(Eegad I just saw a production of Richard the II in L. A. I had to walk out on, dreadful! And I realized how high my standards are because of the incredible work done here and the community you nurture.) Milwaukee is indeed very special.
It is possible, like Richard and Bo said, to make this about honoring the great work done without claiming there are winners and losers, and establish authority outside of the critic's review...
In Time and Newsweek in the last two weeks, I have read two articles which may give pause for further consideration. The first was about arts organizations all around the country-some of them 67 years old, closing down in mid-season, as we have seen happen here. The arts are devastated. Because I work in schools all around the city I can also tell you the education system is devastated as it decreases arts curriculum. In Michigan's state budget next year there will be no funding for the arts!
The one I read today talked about the states with the most economic growth like Texas and Nevada and a projection through 2016. Wisconsin and Michigan came in last in the nation for job growth.
My friends, this move for the awards may needfully bring attendance and funding in an increasingly difficult economy and culture supporting community. Or it may not. But I do believe before the idea is shot down in flames, it is worth giving it a try. Try the green eggs and ham for one season and regroup. If it doesn't work, toss it out, if it makes a difference, there is some useful data on the books about audience development.
Not only are we peopled with wonderful artists, but a rich theatre history thanks to the Lunts which makes us unique. We can all agree there is cause for celebration in this, which is far from inflated egos praising inflated egos.
I loved the Nick Cave letter, Fletch. The muse is indeed a delicate and beautiful gift. Everyone is so incredible the way we honor our muses. But Nick Cave is a celebrity in the financial position to use his celebrity for such inspiring statements. And in our hearts we can stand with him, and even backing the awards, we can stand with him. We could even do a funny backstage ritual to ward off the evil vanity spirits so that no one would take themselves too seriously and have fun with this. Everyone here is so capable of that kind of joy.
But as a pro-active solution to our economic crisis-(am I the only one that saw 1000's of dollars of income evaporate last year?) This could help and be more than a band aid-it could be a beginning. It has already begun.
The dialogue is powerful, as is the work. Don't give up. Let the tension create something wonderful.
Much love, Shannon Sloan-Spice
JOSHUA PARKES
Hello, Jim
Please share this if you are so inclined.
Milwaukee already has a theatre award system, it's called being
cast/hired/recommended for a second gig.
Joshua Parkes
UPDATE 6/9
If I may be allowed to opine once again, I Heartily second (or would it be fifth at this point) the idea of throwing a general celebration- the casual, friendly kind- in lieu of an awards ceremony. While there would be less marketing (which is important, yes), there would be more networking, and cooperation. Perhaps a roast? EndTransmission.
MEGAN WILKERSON
Hi Jim,
I regret not being there to get into a good boozy fight with you about this but I guess sharing my thoughts as they stand at this point (and please do pass them on) is the best I'm going to be able to do.....
I've been following this conversation from here in Ashland and would like to chime in a bit. To begin with, having both won and lost awards in Chicago, I would say that winning is nice and endlessly loosing sucks. But it can be very good publicity for the companies, and the artists involved without being overly onerous if handeled compasionately and honestly.
Hedi already alluded to this I think but mostly what I'm feeling a need to address is the idea of Milwaukee as a close knit community . That was not my experience. I, in fact, found it to be a very "clique" oriented city (with a few notable exceptions).
I was involved in Milwaukee Theatre for more than 5 years (not including having been a student at Caroll longer ago than I care to admit to). Between 2002 & 2008 I designed scenery for or assisted on more than 15 productions at almost every company in town that can aford to hire designers, as well as a few that can't. I helped found a performance collective, taught at the University and at Carroll College, attended shows regularly almost everywhere, and was rarely recognized by anyone in the theatre community and this included people I'd worked with multiple times. Think what you will of me as a designer, love my work, hate it, find me a pain in the butt, or love to drink with me, that is not the point. I was, in fact, a member of that community and never experienced the kind of close knit group some of you describe not wanting to jepordize. In fact I, personally, felt more instantly welcome in the Chicago Theatre Community.
I'm relating my personal experience not to express sour grapes, but to point out that awards (and here I also agree with others that there may be more value to something like "Citations", and those of you who do know me know how I feel about a good party.) have the advantage of sometimes bringing the un or under recognized to the forefront. There are talented people lurking around town you don't even know about.
On a final note I think that competitiveness is an attitude and the existance or lack thereof is not dependant on an award system. The truth is that we are in a competitive art-form/business. Denying that part of our reality doesn't make it go away. Working with it and still managing to be loving, compasionate human beings however, does.
Megan Wilkerson
Scenic Design Assistant
Oregon Shakespeare Festival
Ashland, OR
Friday, June 5, 2009
MOLLY RHODE
Hi Jim,
I have already expressed this opinion to several people, but if you'd like to post it too the masses, please do.
One of the greatest things about our community is the cross-pollination of artists and companies. In a highly competitive industry, I think Milwaukee has managed to keep a non-competitive spirit amongst our theatres and artists. I love that about our city. I think our community is special and rare.
I do not believe awards will be helpful in maintaining our uniquely close-knit family of artists.
Molly Rhode
JONATHAN WAINWRIGHT
i would say my opinions are fine to be public...maybe not as well thought out, maybe a little personal, but echoing the words of Heidi a bit...but again, there is the point, it is very clique-y, and some people are left by the wayside...
and some peoples opinions aren't out there due to their personal popularity or lack thereof...hello...so, anyway, i love and am always committed to (at some personal and professional sacrifice, which now seems, well, silly and naive) Milwaukee as a place to work and grow. no need for an awards thing as a way of getting people in the door. organized and timely advertising would go a long way, and sometimes that just isn't done very well by smaller groups...and that has more to do with being on top of things than it does money in a lot of cases. anyway, i doubt my vague notions will be worth much to all out there, but just trying to stay in the "family" current. peace all- jw
TOM REED
Hi Fletch. There is no lack of conversation about Milwaukee theater and we owe you thanks for prompting and hosting the most productive side of it here. I’d like to toss in my vote.
In spite of my deep respect for some of the people who want these awards, I am against the awards themselves and feel that our whole community would be better served by other marketing innovations.
If someone can show me data that proves that awards, voting for awards, or awards ceremonies themselves bring in new audience members, I would be willing to reconsider. To move forward without actual data, though? I doubt that the awards will serve to prompt enough people to part with their money to justify the damage. Being able to vote for restaurants to receive the Shepherd’s Best of Milwaukee awards has not made me more likely to eat anywhere that I’m not already predisposed to eat. On the other hand, I have been directly contacted by people actively campaigning for those awards, which is in my opinion manipulative and not reflective of anything substantive. Which of us wants to be the equivalent of Olive Garden winning Best of Milwaukee Italian?
Hashing out the details of how to administer and police this will overshadow more urgent conversations.
Bringing in new audiences is one of the two core concerns that we should discuss. Right now we all need to put our heads together to come up with something innovative and uniquely Milwaukee to bring new audiences to the performing arts. The same old, same old, and more of it with more money behind it is not going to pay off, especially for those of us fighting to create new jobs in new spaces. We don’t need better ways to hijack existing audiences and relocate them from one theater to another. We need to find people who don’t already have season tickets and one foot in the grave and get them to start buying tickets all around the city. We need to come up with a comprehensive, collaborative approach that will protect the jobs we have and even make some new ones.
My feeling is that we need to start by really asking everyone to define a niche, promoting those defined (but not restrictive) spaces, and figuring out how to connect new audiences with the stages that suit their needs and tastes. Once we’ve got them, we can encourage them to branch out, probably through open partnerships between one theater and another that encourage audience movement. We also need to question the strong divide between performers and audiences. How do sports teams get people to feel so included in what they do?
In addition to figuring out how to create new audiences, we need to talk about appropriate stewardship of our collective performing arts workplace, too. Some of the resentment on various blogs may relate to a couple of hard realities involving under-the-table casting and the transfer of a painfully small pool of coveted jobs, jobs that, I argue, should be considered our collective job pool, not the exclusive property of those who’ve already marked territory. Who owns a non-profit? Every job here should be considered to belong to us all, and the people chosen to fill those jobs need to have more than their own best interests at heart. When someone takes a job away from other qualified people and then either misuses it or eliminates it, we should all be concerned. I include administrative as well as artistic jobs in this comment.
Until we take a hard look at the distribution of paying jobs in our profession and until we accept that we do have responsibility to one another, awards are a band-aid on a deep laceration. It would not be in my best interest to promote a system that promotes the existing and excludes the new. I am dealing with the financial bruises of another such conversation as we speak, so I don’t pass these thoughts along to you carelessly. We’ve got something that other cities envy and I don’t want to see us ape what they do to our own destruction. Let’s make what we’ve got better starting with some open conversations.
With Love to the theatre community
Tom Reed
RICHARD CARSEY
OK, I'll bite. I may be one of the few who think that if this is handled correctly it could be a great thing for our community on both a local and national level. Despite the excellence of the work that happens here, our audiences (and even we) have a tendency to have folksy "good for you kids" attitude toward artists in our community. I think anything that can allow us to move past that is a great thing.
What is created here is some of the highest caliber theater in the country, and it should be celebrated--and not in just an insular "let's have a cookout" way. Great artistry SHOULD be recognized, SHOULD be remembered, SHOULD be encouraged in any way possible. And if that recognition makes it to the papers, or the websites, or in a listing in a national publication that cares to write about the arts, it increases the visibility and respect we garner in our community. It encourages people to get involved, to attend, to give money. Visibility is a GOOD thing. Recognizing the excellence of the artistic achievement is a GOOD THING!!!
That said, I know that people react negatively to the idea that it might turn into a contest--when one person is recognized, it means that someone else (probably just as worthy) is not. We object to the idea of "competing" against one another, and I completely agree. We all compete in auditioning for roles, why make it happen even more. But I think there are ways to construct it so that it's not a list of nominees and then someone wins.
When I was working in Minneapolis recently, I attended their awards ceremony as a guest of one of the actors I was working with. There are no categories. There are no "Best" awards. There are citations that are given for outstanding work. It can be a designer whose work has been noteworthy in a variety of venues during the year. It can be a choreographer, It can be an actor (at any level--there were citations for performances in small companies as well as large). It could be an ensemble in a production. It could be a writer. it could be for a company that went out on a limb and did a particularly challenging production that reached a new audience.
The point is, there were no categories. No best play, best actor, best actress. There were no set number of citations given each year. The group that chose the citations were representatives of the theater community, community members who had an abiding knowledge and interest in the theater, and yes even one of the critics. No popular vote, no campaigning. Just an honest acknowledgment: here's work everyone should know about. Here's work that's happening in our community that makes this a great place to live. If you didn't know about this theater company, you should check it out.
It was a celebration, it made everyone proud, and it got HUGE attention in the press. It was also sponsored, and corporate donors line up every year to be a part of it, which has enlarged the number of corporate sponsorships to individual companies as well.
Also, I think if it does happen, it should absolutely be named after the Lunts. In our business they are recognized for their excellence and their devotion to the theater. I love the other name ideas as well, but none of them has the history and respect of the Lunts. They are an international part of Wisconsin's artistic heritage.
KEN WILLIAMS
Hey Fletch,
You know what, I am not as eloquent as some of the others writing back to you, so I'll just say that I agree with the majority of the posts. Awards are a bad idea, at the same time I think that we need to get the theatre community to support the theatre community before we can rely on non theatre goers we are trying to catch. As a Milwaukee theatre artist you should be seeing everything, or at least trying to. I know that I am guilty of passing up a show because it's at a particular theatre, but I also know that I'm going to try and change this simply because theatre is theatre and it should be supported whether or not it's "my" kind of theatre. Anyway the point is we as a community need to come together and show support for each other and then others will follow.
Ken
JOHN KISHLINE
Fletch,
I share your objections to the concept of awards for theatrical endeavors in this town.
The only thing we could, should, and are qualified to award is the trophy for worst critic. We all get to read them and who knows better than us what it really takes to make it all work and which blowhard has the worst case of colitis of the ears. This is the award we should bestow at the end of every season, and then raise a mild corrective to those who survived it. But what to call it??? The "Orson" perhaps?
"A critic is someone who watches the battle from afar and then comes down and shoots all the wounded." - Balzac
Kish
JEFF IRCINK
As an actor/playwright (and long-time friend of Tony's) who is a native Wisconsinite living in LA (soon to be living back in WI), I concur with what has been stated here, and i agree with tony's "two-cents worth" open letter to the Milwaukee theater community.
Aren't people sick of the unGodly amount of awards and award ceremonies throughout the year? actors need encouragement. Validation. Fine. Why can't the performance be enough? or a nice review? All too often, competent actors (even beyond competent actors) are not recognized because their performance didn't headline at the Milwaukee Rep or there wasn't any coverage in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel or it's not ON Broadway or it's in Cedar Rapids, IA. "Theater" thrives in many forms and in many places. What will one more award help to accomplish???
Anyone read the latest reviews from my short play in Miami? I'm kidding. (No, really...I can email them to you). :)
TAMARA MARTINSEK
The core of Milwaukee Theater community and the reason many of us have chosen to stay here has always been our mutual respect and mutual support of each other - who of us have not seen (or been in) our share of everything at every level simply because we want to support our "friends and colleagues" and keep our art thriving in our little burg!
We often see brilliance – sometimes not quite so brilliant – but we always see good people putting the best of their talent out there on the stage. From auditions, to reviews to audience reaction we are continually allowing ourselves to be “judged” and that’s OK because it is essential to our lives on the theater, it is essential to our growth as an artist - –
"Acting provides the fulfillment of never being fulfilled. You're never as good as you'd like to be. So there's always something to hope for." - Washington Irving
How do you award that?
JOEL KOPISCHKE
given how unlikely it is that i would ever win an award, i am very much against it.
seriously, i believe most individuals would find the concept laughable but mostly harmless on a personal level. my guess is that the most damaging effect, especially long term, would be to somehow grant official status to the sense of "haves" and "have-nots" that already is felt. and if that kind of codification puts a damper on the next born-of-passion seedling theatre company (however large or small), then the future of milwaukee theatre suffers a tremendous blow.
for skylight was once just clair richardson's half-baked idea to put on operettas in a rooftop garden, chamber theatre was a crazy notion monty & ruth cooked up to share their love of shaw, and next act's ancestry traces its roots to a dingy storefront in the 5th ward where clavis theatre performed even if props and costumes had to be taken home each nite so that rats would not get at them. what would have happened to in tandem or bunny gumbo or any number of other small theatres here or already gone if they had to fight an additional hurdle of not being "nominated".
throw a party, celebrate milestones (skylight's or sunset's 50 years, somebody's Xth anniversary in the rep company, the first season for a new company, josh schmidt's off-broadway success), and maybe hand out some spoof awards to show we don't take ourselves too seriously. invite everyone from the rep to the small community theatres to the local college theatre departments (and maybe even cabaret singers) and really let everyone see what a theatre COMMUNITY looks like and feels like.
HEIDI MEULLER SMITH
First of all, thanks to Fletch for this forum and the connections he provides every day for the Theatre community.
MY reaction to the hub bub.....I see no good reason for a competition. My reaction to the bigger issue, and this is me speaking in that way that sometimes gets me in trouble, but here goes. Like it or not there are already cliques and factions, isolation and popularity contests the "Ins" and the "Outs", maybe all of this talk will help us all to be more sensitive to that which already exists.
NORMAN MOSES
Fletch,
Thanks for, as Bo put it, being the god of communication. You provide our
wonderful community with an invaluable service. We owe you a great debt of
gratitude.
I talked to Sean Malone out at Ten Chimneys this afternoon as the flurry of
e-mails heated up, and he just wanted people to know that Ten Chimneys is
not involved in this at all as far as developing the idea. They have only
offered to open up their doors to us if this is something that the community
wishes to have happen. I think it's important for folks to know that.
Sean and Ten Chimneys have been a shining example of how to support artists
and the artist community. We are lucky to have them behind us 100% in
anything we wish to do. We need to take advantage more of the generosity of
that organization, and more importantly to a appreciate and cherish Sean's
dedication to all of us.
You may pass this on.
Peace out, bro.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
MARY MACDONALD KERR
I had heard rumors about some sort of theatre awards being started in
Milwaukee, but had never been officially asked my opinion. I'm taking this recent hubbub as an opportunity to voice my opposition to the idea.
In a nutshell - I think creating theatre is an art, not a sport. I think Milwaukee has an unusually family-like community, and that awards for Best Art would detract, not add to this feeling. I'd be very supportive of an "End of the Season" gathering honoring our collective blood sweat and tears for the year. Perhaps there are "awards" honoring long careers, long lived
companies, unseen contributions etc.
It's just my two cents......
Mary MacDonald Kerr
BO JOHNSON
When this concept was first trotted out for opinions last year, I was one of the voices that supported it. So, for what it's worth, I'll explain my reasons.
But let me also say, right up front, that the mechanics of the awards as they've been engineered so far (and please, those of you who have done honest, good faith work on that engineering, don't take offense. Your efforts are much appreciated. I trust you will take my comments in the spirit that they are meant.) does not seem like the most advantageous system for, what I think, is the only purpose for awards.
The only real reason for industry awards is their use as a marketing tool. But I also agree with Fletch, marketing an award the season after it has been granted is a fairly weak tool. I believe that the strongest means of marketing is done by empowering the general audience with the ability to decide who wins the awards.
The first reaction of any theatre artist, after reading the last paragraph, will be, "No way would I trust the general public to know the difference between shit and shinola." And I agree, you shouldn't. That's not the point. The point is that we need to find ways of motivating more people to go see theatre. If their ability to chose who wins meaningless awards is one of the ways to promote that, I think its worth trying.
As a community, we would have to just constantly remind ourselves of all the things that Fletch is absolutely right about; these awards are arbitrary, unfairly weighted, prejudiced, popularity contests, and are no way an indicator of the best work that happens in this community. The best that we can hope for is that it prompts a percentage of the general market to go see a few more shows every season because they want to be a part of the awards process.
Honestly, an awards ceremony isn't even necessary. Send the winners a letter saying that they were "given an award by a group of cretans who sat through your performance reading the program and forgetting to turn off their cell phone," and leave it at that. But make sure that the press gets informed about the winners and hope that somebody writes a few more articles.
The WAMI (Wisconsin Area Music Industry) awards are a reasonable parallel. Winners are voted on by the general public with a ballot that's supplied in Wisconsin's major newspapers and on-line. The nominees (in case you've ever wondered) are selected by a ballot that's supplied to WAMI members only. Which is why local musicians give some prestige to the honor of being nominated and none to the final winner. But it keeps local musicians in the public eye. (There is an awards ceremony. It has been at the theatre in the Potowatomi Casino for the last 5 or 6 years. Its a drunk fest. Oh man!)
Similarly, a model where nominees are selected in any number of ways (by the critics definitely NOT being one of them); by the producers, all peers in the industry, peers only in that discipline, etc., etc., but the final winners are decided by the public seems, to me, to be the most useful purpose for awards. If the general public ballots are only made available to audiences in attendance at theatrical events, as opposed to easy availability in newspapers or on-line, it might be a better audience building tool, though a more complicated system to deal with. I don't know.
So, those are my opinions, and there are lots of other details I won't get into here; equity/noneq, community/professional, bigbudget/nobudget. All of that is really secondary to the one main question - will this increase audience numbers? I can understand and respect all of the reasons why anyone might disagree. And if, as a community, we decide that awards have more negatives than the possible positive, its fine with me if we don't have them. Again, I thank those people who have put time and effort into trying to create something for the sake of promoting our industry. My differences of opinion in the model in no way diminishes my respect.
Love to all, and especially Fletch as the god of communication,
BO
ROSE PICKERING
Dear Fletch, Thank you for your thoughtful and eloquent post. I, too, object to the idea of theater awards and would not participate in same.
When the late Journal/Sentinel critic Jay Joslyn proposed such awards at his farewell party, I spoke out against them, even though it was hardly an appropriate time to contradict the wishes of the honoree. Whether you work Equity or non-Equity, at a large theater or a small, there is no way to compare any performances in any category: apples and oranges every time, and theater is not a competitive sport. Please feel free to cross post my response.
Rose Pickering
Milwaukee Rep
NEIL HAVEN
Hi Jim, Nice letter, a lot of good questions brought up. I have a reply on the matter, forward it on to the list if you'd like. Let me know if you do.
I also have misgivings about an awards ceremony in such a small theatre community, although I believe and hope that those promoting it are doing so with the best of intentions: encouraging quality theatre, and bringing annual attention in the community to the theatre scene. With the the newspapers suffering, how are we going to keep the public abreast of Milwaukee Theatre happenings? But you bring up a lot of good arguments for this particular solution, Jim.
I whole-heartedly agree with your proposal of an annual gathering, featuring skits, karaoke, speeches, perhaps some roasting or satire of the local scene. Perhaps there would even be opportunity for a session of accolades, without it being an awards process. Maybe a representative from each theatre with an opportunity to tout some highlights and acknowledge outstanding work.
As a young struggling community member, (or partial member in the past two years that I've been at school in Vegas,) I've been aware of various annual social gatherings: Christmas parties, cast parties, end of season parties, the nights out after Combat. Some of these events I've been invited to and some I've not. It would be nice to have an annual event that was open to all so that no one would be questioning whether they deserved to be there, questioning whether they are part of the "old boys club" yet.
It seems that, as with Nick Cave's sentiments, there will be some in the Milwaukee theatre community that decide not to participate in any awards ceremony. But it may go forth anyway, and many others will likely choose to participate. Instead of focusing on a boycott of their efforts, perhaps those uninterested parties should politely withdraw from any nominations and put their efforts into organizing the "Milwaukee Theatre Party." My point being, whether you support the awards ceremony or not, let's pursue the theatre gathering idea regardless. We need not be limited to one or the other.
-Neil Haven
DAVID CESCARINI
Hey Fletch,
I agree with your case against the awards idea. I've felt a similar resistance from the vast majority of theatre folk I've worked with over the course of this past year. I've also heard from some Chicago people about the political, divisive nature of the Jeffs down there.
An awards system would reinforce the worst type of theatre criticism: that which decides yea or nay, all or nothing, best ever, and the many other black-and-white judgments that obscure the complex and subjective nature of theatre. What a nightmare.
Next Act will take no part in whatever awards system that arises. I voiced my objections early on and was also told we'd have a more collective debate. That hasn't happened.
The most weighty argument for the Luntannes* given me has been to be used as an "awesome marketing tool." Hmmmmm. As you state in your case, it'll all be after the fact, not the same show, superficial imprimatur.
I certainly agree that we all need to sell more tickets. This town has long-suffered from a complacency that allows dull or nasty reviews to kill ticket sales. Nothing short of a rave (legit or not) seems to have any positive box office affect. But how do we collectively challenge the Milwaukee theatre-going public to "use it or lose it?" How do we get control of our own story? As we look to solve this very central concern, an awards system would be an unfortunate distraction. As one prominent, local professional has just wired in, "useless and potentially toxic."
A party would be good. One where we weren't honoring the demise of a colleague or a company. Maybe a convening of sorts, that had a more focused agenda than the gathering at 10 Smokestacks awhile back. And hopefully closer to town. Theatre Wisconsin has been meeting like this for years. Maybe we can expand that vision? Kind of a local TCG-type convention. That way we could decide what's best about all of us and the crazy thing that we do. Then we figure out how to fill our seats.
How about a Fletch's list vote on this awards deal? I think that would be a pretty good (and damn quick) survey. So, I vote no. So does Charles. With Fletch, that's 3 against. Anybody else? And by the way, who's eligible to vote? Do we need a committee to decide? Yikes.
David Cecsarini
Next Act
*And why Alfie and Lynn anyway? -- a Dewey, a Monty, a Jolly Jay, all at least as deserving a memorial as far as Milwaukee theatre goes.
TONY CLEMENTS
fletch.
i couldn't have said it better myself. but i'll try:
i'm no longer a part of the milwaukee theater community, per se.
but in my years away from milwaukee, i've done nothing but talk about what an amazing theater community milwaukee has.
i recall sitting backstage during a "mamma mia" understudy rehearsal, telling a group of fellow understudies about the great actors i had the honor to work with in wisconsin. i named them. i talked at length about each and recounted my favorite performances. my bragging on milwaukee always ended with what a supportive community it can be, and in fact i often mentioned that there "are no awards, no great honors, just great actors." it's a phrase i came to enjoy.
i've seen crap at the milwaukee rep and brilliant stuff at broadway baby dinner theater (and vice-versa.) i've seen so-so performances at the chamber theater, and performances that moved me to tears at waukesha civic theater. which of those establishments, which of those actors would be included, or rather, EXCLUDED from these awards? looking back, would theater tesseract have qualified? or clavis? how about charmaine denoyer, or dale gutzman? ray bradford? tom marks and michael wilson? john bohan? josephine busalacchi?
you wanna have a party? good god have a party. celebrate the season. celebrate each other. make fun of each other -- norman moses is ripe for the picking. and invite EVERYONE (even those folks from the whitefish bay players.) giving a few select folks an award seems to me to be just the opposite of wanting to come together as a community, as a group of friends.
seriously, have a barbecue for crying out loud.
i'll end by including a quote from one of my favorite films, "all about eve" (shut up.)
"The Theatuh, the Theatuh. What book of rules says the Theater exists only within some ugly buildings crowded into one square mile of New York City? Or London, Paris or Vienna?
Listen, Junior, and learn.
Want to know what the Theater is? A flea circus. Also opera. Also rodeos, carnivals, ballets, Indian tribal dances, Punch and Judy, a one-man band -- all Theater. Wherever there's magic and make-believe and an audience -- there's Theater. Donald Duck, Ibsen, and The Lone Ranger, Sarah Bernhardt, Poodles Hanneford, Lunt and Fontanne, Betty Grable, Rex and Wild, and Eleanora Duse. You don't understand them all, you don't like them all, why should you? The Theater's for everybody -- you included, but not exclusively.
So don't approve or disapprove.
It may not be your Theater,
but it's Theater of somebody, somewhere."
MOST SINCERELY,
TONY CLEMENTS
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.
