Your Feedback - Nomination and Ballot Process
We've heard from our loyal ART readers, and now is the opportunity for discussion:
Some folks feel the ballot process can be daunting - it is hard to remember all the shows from each year, difficult to recall all the performers and designers, etc. In addition, some voters seem to feel guilty filling out the form when they have not seen a cross-section of shows during the year.
As with any voting process, the higher the voter turnout, the more ART reflects the consensus of the theatre community. We here at ART have been researching our options.
One that has great appeal is to go to a two ballot system, with the initial nominations made by a "nominating committee." Many other cities have awards based on this system (Helen Hayes and the Tony's, for example). The committee makes nominations, and then a ballot is prepared with approximately five nominations in each category, which are voted on by the entire ART readership.
The three topics under discussion include:
1. If you are currently a reader, but not a voter, would a ballot that only required you to check one box out of five for each category encourage you to vote? If not, what system would you prefer?
2. If a nomination committee were put together, would you be interested in being a nominater?
3. In addition, we have had requests for the ART season to run from July to June rather than January to December. Is this something that would interest people?
If you have opinions on these or other subjects, please post your comments or email me directly at art_richmond@yahoo.com. Based on the response, next year might feature a whole new ART!
Categories: general_theatre
Some folks feel the ballot process can be daunting - it is hard to remember all the shows from each year, difficult to recall all the performers and designers, etc. In addition, some voters seem to feel guilty filling out the form when they have not seen a cross-section of shows during the year.
As with any voting process, the higher the voter turnout, the more ART reflects the consensus of the theatre community. We here at ART have been researching our options.
One that has great appeal is to go to a two ballot system, with the initial nominations made by a "nominating committee." Many other cities have awards based on this system (Helen Hayes and the Tony's, for example). The committee makes nominations, and then a ballot is prepared with approximately five nominations in each category, which are voted on by the entire ART readership.
The three topics under discussion include:
1. If you are currently a reader, but not a voter, would a ballot that only required you to check one box out of five for each category encourage you to vote? If not, what system would you prefer?
2. If a nomination committee were put together, would you be interested in being a nominater?
3. In addition, we have had requests for the ART season to run from July to June rather than January to December. Is this something that would interest people?
If you have opinions on these or other subjects, please post your comments or email me directly at art_richmond@yahoo.com. Based on the response, next year might feature a whole new ART!
Categories: general_theatre
posted by ART Newsletter at
4:48 PM
7 Comments:
One vote just in to run the newsletter by season, rather than by calendar year. The voter concluded that most everyone in town runs their season's September through June, and summer seasons June through August. What are your thoughts?
By
ART Newsletter, at 3/16/2007 9:37 AM
A very appreciative comment from another loyal ART Reader requesting we leave the newsletter and nomination process "as is."
Keep those comments coming!
By
ART Newsletter, at 3/16/2007 2:20 PM
I prefer the newsletter as is, rather than by season. I am curious how a show can get recognition for best Musical, Best Ensemble, best costumes, best musical direction and not get recognized for best direction. I guess shows just direct themselves.
By
Anonymous, at 3/19/2007 3:20 PM
Interesting previous comment. Sometimes shows are good IN SPITE of the direction due to great actors, crew, costumers, musical directors and especially the script/music.
By
Anonymous, at 3/20/2007 10:21 AM
ART responds regarding direction:
Just like with other awards, some categories are not voted on in a manner that matches the votes in other categories. As an example, not many people would have predicted Crash to win Best Motion Picture over Brokeback Mountain at last years Oscars. And this year, Pan’s Labyrinth won a several awards, but did not win Best Foreign Language Film.
By
ART Newsletter, at 3/20/2007 11:22 AM
Sadly, I have been in numerous shows that have directed themselves. Some of them even turned out pretty good. That's not to marginalize the importance of a director. Everything is relative. An uninspired director can luck into a great show, but that show would have been even better with a creative, involved director. Likewise, a great director can raise the quality of a show, even if saddled with a weak script, actors, and designers.
Plus, some shows are just less challenging from a directorial standpoint. So, even if a show as a whole is great, maybe people voted for shows where the director's job was more difficult or creative.
Who knows? It's all very subjective. But I do think that Best Show and Best Director need not always be for the same production.
By
Anonymous, at 3/21/2007 12:39 AM
I've been in many musicals where the musical director did the lion's share of the work (especially in review-type shows) and got no recognition for it in Roy Proctor's annual awards in the Times Dispatch. Thanks for giving credit to these fine people.
By
Anonymous, at 3/21/2007 8:56 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home