Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« New American Horror Story Teasers!… | Over the Weekend, Marilyn Manson To… »

Monday, August 20, 2012

Theater Apparently, Some Seattle Theater People Have Their Panties in a Twist About This Year's Gregory Awards

Posted by Brendan Kiley on Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 3:09 PM

What's that? You've never heard of the Gregory Awards and/or don't really care about the Seattle theater-world version of the Oscars?

You're not alone. To me, the Gregory Awards (like the Oscars) has always seemed like a glorified cast party. Or a corporate convention. Or an annual bash at your local Elks Lodge. People within a certain narrow sphere of a given industry get gussied up, give speeches, get loaded, get laid, and have their morale boosted for the coming year. And that's great! They should! As often as possible! After all, it's what we do every year at the Genius Awards. There's no harm in it.

But their (and our) backstage squabbles are boring, internecine, and not anything they/we should expect the rest of the world to get exercised about. (The one part I care about is a potential teen-writer award that might happen.

That said, I'm getting some emails from incensed theater-people about this year's list of nominees. Comments include complaints about the nomination process, the "algorithms" used to pick nominees, etc. etc. For example:

Brendan: I'm a little surprised you haven't chimed in on the Gregory nominations. Seems like just about everyone is either upset or baffled or both at this year's list, and the possible problematic system behind this year's results. Worth talking about?

And:

Well, first it seems everyone is a little baffled at the shows that got the nominations (The Callers? Cinderella? First Date?) and the shows that got totally snubbed (Clybourne Park? Mary Stuart? White Hot?).

And so on.

When I re-read these emails from the perspective of an audience member—or anyone at all who isn't a working theater artist involved in all the picayune politics—I try to give a shit. I try REAAAAAL hard. And I can't.

So, email correspondent #1: Sorry, but I don't really think it's worth talking about. HOWEVER! If you do, here's your Slog thread to give a damn and talk about it. I bet you a hypothetical $50 that this comments thread will be barren.

But I'd be glad to be proved wrong.

FacebookShare

Comments (21) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

A request: please stop using the phrase "panties in a twist" to describe unhappy persons. At the very least, make the referenced article of clothing more gender neutral.

Posted by yelahneb

on August 20, 2012 at 3:27 PM

(crickets)

Posted by Doctor Memory

on August 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Undies in a bunch.

Posted by bareboards on August 20, 2012 at 3:40 PM

If readers could somehow know before clicking that the beginnings of a debate on the merits of "panties in a twist" are contained herein, I think you'd be out $50.

Posted by Dougsf on August 20, 2012 at 3:45 PM

I care! I care deeply. In fact, I care more deeply about this issue than Charles Mudede cares about Marxism (which is proof, somehow, of the immense relevance of Marxism to every aspect of our daily lives).

Posted by Scalpel on August 20, 2012 at 3:47 PM

I'm really excited about the variety of the Gregory Awards this year. It's giving smaller theatres a chance to get nominated. We already know the most polished work comes out of the big houses, so now let's celebrate the fact that Seattle has a growing, thriving theatre scene outside of those.

It's also giving those theatres incentives to up their artistic game.

Posted by EmilySavesTheDay on August 20, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Sorry, never heard of them, and I used to have seasons tickets to The Rep, The Empty Space, and a number of other local theatres.

As well as Fringe Fest and many other things.

Can't say I ever cared about them, and awards like this wouldn't get me to buy tix.

Posted by Will in Seattle

on August 20, 2012 at 3:53 PM

@5 I agree with you!

Posted by EmilySavesTheDay on August 20, 2012 at 4:02 PM

@3 That will do nicely!

Posted by yelahneb

on August 20, 2012 at 4:07 PM

I care about them, but I'm part of that small and insular community.

Posted by Geni on August 20, 2012 at 4:09 PM

@ 1 and 9. Why do you assume "panties" is gender-specific? Your heteronormativity, your problem!

Posted by Brendan Kiley on August 20, 2012 at 4:12 PM

I prefer "knickers in a twist."

Posted by Zebes

on August 20, 2012 at 4:24 PM

There should be an 'ensemble category (last year's Cloud 9 cast made that obvious)! Sarah Rudinoff should've been nominated with the 'Torso' cast: Stephen Hando was gut-wrenching, and the other actors made tricky, nuanced layers of character work look easy-peasy."White Hot" could have been a contender for an ensemble prize, as well. Maybe also '1993 (You Never Step in the Same River Twice)' at Annex and 'Lie of the Mind' at ACT, too.
There should also be a solo show category: Nick Garrison's 'I am My Own Wife'? Matt Smith's 'All My Children'? Dina Martina's 'Ample Wattage'?

Posted by Buttercup on August 20, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Just popping in to do my bit to cost Brendan his hypothetical $50.

Or instead of "barren" did you mean "devoid of useful content", or "fruitless"? Because that seemed like a safer bet.

Posted by Warren Terra on August 20, 2012 at 4:54 PM

yaaawwwwnnnnn

Posted by tabathalphabet on August 20, 2012 at 5:00 PM

If only there was some way to monetarily reward plays that manage to attract large audiences and send them home entertained.

Posted by Somebody Should Sell Tickets on August 20, 2012 at 5:05 PM

( zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz )

Posted by sperifera on August 20, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Yeah, this is an industry congratulating its own... Nothing wrong with that, certainly not all that interesting to outsiders, and infinitely fascinating to those on the inside. However, the nomination model this year smacks of the worst kind of Seattle Egalitarian Bullshit and is of course flawed, as naturally the plan of having a cluster of volunteer nominators assigning numerical values to art within 48 hrs of experiencing it would obviously and inevitably prove to be. Not a surprise that crowd pleasers and late season offerings rose to the top, and that a serious critical assessment of a year's worth of plays is nowhere to be found.

But if it is a good party for those on the inside then it will serve its purpose. And drama queens love to whine, so that purpose is apparently well served too.

Posted by Cuddlefish on August 20, 2012 at 9:33 PM

dudes can't wear panties? And the Gregory awards are like a dog and pony show.

Posted by onthepathofthebeam on August 21, 2012 at 9:09 AM

18. Crowd pleasers rising to the top, huh?

What's the purpose of theatre again?

Posted by Gomez

on August 21, 2012 at 10:07 AM

@11 I'm guessing you're probably just being contrary at this point, but regardless of the gender of the hypothetical wearer, the use of panties in this context implies that things feminine = weakness and/or a proclivity for drama.

Posted by yelahneb

on August 21, 2012 at 11:17 AM