We want to thank everyone who has contributed to the conversation so far this week.
Today is our Grab Bag Day. The last three days of our virtual town hall were dedicated to specific topics that we've had a great deal of feedback about. Today we open it up to hear about other ideas and suggestions that you might have.
Please keep in mind the ground rules.
Aaron had an idea before he died that we both thought might be worth discussion. He proposed, due to the awards being called the "innovative" theater awards, that there be some kind of "innovation index." Since the name of the awards makes it seem to celebrate innovation (which I think is part of the huge reason people were furious about the revivals winning--they're getting an "innovation" award? For remounting someone else's old show? When so many of us are pushing the envelope and working so hard to push the future of theater forward?), he thought it would be easy enough to add a category at the end of the score card asking "how innovative was this show?". That score could then factor in to all the other scores, as maybe 10% of the total score for each category (so the innovation score would add from 1-10 points to the show's score in each category). So that shows that are more innovative are given a "leg up" so to speak. I'm not sure if that would cause a huge drama/problem for the revival folks, but we thought it would be an easy change and seems to totally go with the mission and name of the awards, and would help ensure that innovation is what is truly being celebrated (and hey, if that revival of Guys and Dolls is truly innovative and amazing? Then awesome, we should celebrate that). That was his thought on the matter. Of course he wasn't really one to jump into the fray--I was hoping he would have a chance to express it to you guys, but sadly, that never happened.
ReplyDeleteAlong the lines of what Gyda is saying - I think some sort of definition of the scale of what "outstanding" is for all peer judges would be SO helpful. It seems SO subjective to personal biases right now. For example, a company who has been registering shows for some time can be measured against their own previous productions if a judge is familiar with them - which seems to create a bias (sometimes positive, sometimes negative). Whereas a one-off producer or company that is new to the community does not carry that weight. Am I measuring a Nosedive or Collaborationtown or APAC show against the greater community or against other shows of theirs that I might have seen? Is it an outstanding Nosedive show? Or is it an outstanding show? Can it be an outstanding production if you didn't like the script (for new work and revivals)?
ReplyDeleteI think Anonymous makes a good point about subjectivity and, for lack of a better description, "judge training". Maybe we can do a better job of reviewing with judges the intended criteria and reminding them that they have all the scores 0-100 to choose.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that any of us “remount” someone else's "Old Show" perhaps it would be useful to separate New works from revivals. Trust me "old shows" don't come self assembled or firect themselves and present as many challenges new works sometimes more. I think we are celebrating off off Broadway as well as what is innovative. New work is terrific and always needed but one cannot ignore the innovators that came before us and that have contributed to our dramatic repertoire and cultural heritage. I feel often we are comparing apples to Oranges and perhaps this what Gyda is saying?
ReplyDeleteI would also change the rule where you have to register your show 3 weeks in advance to a shorter time period.
ReplyDeleteAs I just discovered from wanting to go back and check winners on the IT site, if the awards are to be taken seriously the way they are presented on the site should be spiffed up a bit. The nominees and winners from 2010-2011 aren't listed there, and only the nominees in 2005 and 2009 are listed, with no winner indicated. And all the years are formatted slightly differently. There should be some consistency to this. Also, it seems that a link to these should have a bit more prominence on the home page than being just one more item on the side menu -- and one that defaults to opening on the 2008 awards right now -- as while there's a lot more to the IT Awards organization now that just the awards, in the end, it IS about the IT Awards.
ReplyDelete@Ian, thanks, yes, you're right about the site and boy do we know it. Were overdue for some updates, and actually major revisions are underway. We couldn't agree more.
ReplyDeleteNick Micozzi
Therein IS the problem. I think there needs to be two different organizations. One to honor and award any Off Off Broadway work out there much like the current case with the ITA. Then another organization that honors and awards the new and never before done or done in a particular way - calling itself the New Creative Theater Awards NCTA or such.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 4 (@2:55PM) - I appreciate this concern because I'm part of the team that relates directly with registering and judging.
ReplyDeleteIf you don't have all your "ducks in a row" a full 21 days before opening, we understand. We've all been there! Complete as much registration information as you have, as it gets confirmed.
You can edit your listing on our website up to the first performance. Trust me, I'll be in touch if you still don't have a specific performance space, date, curtain times, and assigned delegate when I start scheduling judges.
I am here to help :)