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.