TheatreWashington, the nonprofit entity which conducts the Helen Hayes Awards, Washington’s annual celebration of theater excellence, last night announced that it would henceforth be giving two awards in most categories, based on the number and percentage of Equity actors in each production.
The announcement, which theatreWashington made in the Washington Post’s 15th Street Conference Center, comes against a background of controversy over the current system of giving awards. The current system pits small, non-Equity theaters against companies with multi-million dollar budgets for the Helen Hayes prizes. Perhaps surprisingly, it is the larger theaters which objected most vociferously to the current arrangement.
The new system, announced by theatreWashington Board member Glen Howard (who headed the task force which devised the system), will create two categories of awards – the “Helens”, for which productions in non-Equity houses in which less than 51% of the cast and no more than three actors are working under an Equity contract are eligible; and the “Hayes”, for which productions in houses working under an Equity agreement, and productions in which 51% or more of the cast or four or more actors are working under Equity contracts, are eligible.
There will be awards for outstanding work in Helen productions and Hayes productions for most categories, resulting in forty-seven awards in all. The distinction between a Helen production and a Hayes production will be “internal and administrative only” according to theatreWashington President and CEO Linda Levy; all awards given will be Helen Hayes Awards, regardless of the category of the production.
The new categorization of production, which goes into effect next January 1, 2014, goes hand-in-glove with significant reforms in the judging process, Howard announced. Henceforth, separate panels of judges will see all the productions in a given category, and will evaluate no other productions. This will assure that all productions in a given category are seen by the same judges, Howard said, thus eliminating the randomizing influence of any judge’s individual aesthetic.
In addition to the four panels of judges seeing Helen plays, Hayes plays, Helen musicals and Hayes musicals, there will be a fifth panel of judges which sees only new plays. Those judges will evaluate the script only, for purposes of giving the Charles MacArthur Award for best new play. The new play panel will see productions these new plays in addition to a panel of judges who will evaluate the production’s other artistic merits.
The evaluative process will also be changed, Howard announced. Although the Helen Hayes Awards organization will continue to determine nominees on the basis of numerical scores given each production, once nominations are done, each panel will meet and discuss productions and performances, and then (individually) rank each nominee in each category.
Howard also said that the selection criteria for judges would become more demanding. Starting in 2014, judges will not only have to be theater experts but widely recognized as such. Howard identified theater professionals (present and retired), theater academics, and longstanding audience members as the three sources of judges the organization would use. The judges would be nominated, vetted and selected by the Artistic Directors of Helen Hayes member companies, subject to a final interview by theatreWashington.
In addition to doubling the number of awards in most categories, Helen Hayes Awards would be adding a new category for Outstanding Choreography, Howard announced. In the future, there will be separate categories for choreography in a musical and choreography in a play (including, but not limited to, fight choreography). Dance choreography in a play would still be considered play choreography. “If there’s a minuet in Midsummer Night’s Dream, it’s still choreography in a play,” Howard said. The move means that there will be four awards for choreography – two each in the Helen and Hayes categories.
While the number of awards in most categories is being increased, the number of awards in one category – nonresident productions – will be reduced to two. From 2014 onward, Howard said, there would only be awards for outstanding nonresident production and outstanding nonresident performance.
There will continue to be only one Charles MacArthur Award for outstanding new work and one John Aniello Award for emerging theater company.
Howard admitted that some issues remain for the theatreWashington board to resolve. The nonprofit has resolved that no award will be given in a category unless a “critical mass” of approval has been achieved by at least one production, but the Board has not determined what would constitute critical mass. And Howard admitted that a Helen Hayes Awards ceremony which gave out forty-seven awards would be unworkable from an artistic and financial standpoint, but that the Board has not worked out a resolution. TheatreWashington has some time to solve that problem; the first awards night under the new system will not be until Spring of 2015.
Howard said that the changes were motivated by five goals: making sure that theaters were meeting agreed-upon professional standards, promoting quality, consistency and credibility of judging, increasing the value of the awards as a marketing tool, making the system more manageable, understandable and transparent, and maintaining a sense of community among theater professionals. He said that his task force rejected any proposed change which didn’t advance one or more of those goals.
According to Howard, the task force and theatreWashington Board chose number and percentage of Equity cast to distinguish among productions because it was an “industry-relevant criteria” which was a “reasonable proxy”, unlike, he said, budget or size of theater company.
The task force chair also revealed that the Board would be looking at what it means to be a professional production for purposes of the Helen Hayes Awards. To this point, any production which pays its artists, however little, is a professional production. TheatreWashington’s Board will be considering the establishment of minimum pay amounts to determine whether a production is “professional” or not, for purposes of the awards. If the Board decides to do so, Howard said, companies would be given a two-year transition period; and if the Board determined that one of a company’s productions was not a professional production that would not affect the status of the company’s other productions.
CEO Levy added that even if a production was not deemed a professional one for purposes of eligibility for a Helen Hayes Awards, the company and the production would still receive the other benefits theatreWashington provides its member companies.
Reaction among the hundred or so people who attended the theatreWashington announcement seemed to reflect cautious approval – and perhaps some relief. “You guys used a lot of brain juice to come up with these changes,” said Venus Theatre Artistic Director Deb Randall. “I know you’ve come a really long way.”
WCSC Avant Bard Emeritus Artistic Director Christopher Henley, whose gave a detailed critique of various proposals to change the awards in this article, pronounced himself pleased. “I was on record hoping for more categories, so I was very glad to see that presented last night. Also, I…was happy to see the ‘second look’ feature returned to the judging process.”
He expressed misgivings, however, about future plans to qualify theaters based on compensation levels. “I have concerns about the effect that compensation levels might have on the eligibility of excellent work,” he said, “and also on artistic choices (such as cast sizes and budget allocations) that companies might make to remain eligible.” He remained optimistic that further dialogue would result in a workable solution: “I am anxious to engage, as invited, in a conversation about how to institute those eligibility requirements with the least amount of collateral damage or unintended consequences. Everyone in the community should understand the importance of engaging with theatreWashington. They listen and a good argument can affect decisions.”
MetroStage Artistic Director Carolyn Griffith gave a nuanced response: “I have tremendous respect for everyone involved in theatreWashington and the level of commitment they have for promoting Washington theater,” she said. “They have tackled a complicated problem and come up with a very interesting plan. There are still a lot of details to work out.”
More?
Christopher Henley: The Helen Hayes Awards: Why I’ve changed my mind
Thanks Tim! The true crisis I face is the evolution of new plays. After producing 45 scripts only one has ever been considered for a Charles McArthur Award. This, despite receiving accolades from other organizations such as Curve Magazine and the American Theatre Critics Award. So, news that new plays will receive their own attention at theatreWashington is wonderful!
Here’s why:
There are two major things happening as a kind of reaction to the lack of opportunity for unknown living playwrights.
1. An influx of readings that can lead nowhere except to make the play work better as a reading. Then there’s always the gratuitous World Premiere that can be so glorified the tag becomes a death mark on a new work because little or no incentive exists to do a second and third production. World Premiere seems to convey that a writer has arrived instead of conveying that a new work is at the very beginning of what could be a long life-cycle -provided an engaged audience and careful artistic team surround and guide it. Three full productions are needed for a writer to see where the piece should land most appropriately. This is rare. Instead we get the fruit-fly life cycle forced onto potentially long standing plays. It’s a crisis.
2.To put a bandaid on the reading cycle, there seems to be a reaction of mostly one act festivals for new works. Not to begrudge the one-act. I love that form. But, I work with writers now that intend on getting their play down to a one act length even when it’s a full length play. This has become their standard format. So, we are losing the two act play. With the loss of intermission, those of us on a shoestring lose the opportunity to sell things in the lobby that help us keep the lights on. Letting the experience be the focus of the evening instead of a supplemental fill is a fading form. The experience can feel rushed and it doesn’t allow actors and audience to refresh at intermission.
Because of this, few full length new plays by unknown writers are being produced. And because of the focus on readings and one acts as well as commercial work, the funding for new full length plays is incredibly difficult to pin down.
Commercial work is different than new cutting edge work. And, that needs to be articulated and understood. Both are essential. When we enter the mud of commercial companies pretending to be cutting edge I become judgemental personally and professionally and can perceive them as the bully on the playground pushing their weight around.
Molly Smith said it herself after building an entire facility specifically aimed at producing new works (btw, Venus has produced more on under $50,000 a year at a storefront in Laurel). It’s really important to understand the power of small theatres. We have the flexibility to bring in brand new pieces full tilt boogie and over time we develop the audiences who know that’s what we’re about. Audiences not likely to favor commercial work. Daring individuals that come back loyally even if one show doesn’t suit their fancy. It’s what Studio did when the 7-11 was unmarked on 14th Street. It’s what Woolly did in the bowling alley basement and there used to be a real respect for that moxy and bravado. You hear the story of Molly Smith driving to Alaska and back for theatre seating and maybe you get thoughts. All of these people/stories have inspired me!
“In 2004, Smith said a key reason for a costly expansion and the third theater was because Arena felt handcuffed when it came to new material. “This is where finances come in,” Smith told the Post, describing her programming choices for the 2004-05 season, when a classic, a musical and a Pulitzer winner edged out the untested works being considered. “We realized we can’t do any brand-new plays by living authors.” At that time, Smith and the staff talked about the bright future when the Cradle would set them free to stage new works.”
Nelson Pressley, WaPo Oct, 2012
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-10-12/entertainment/35498312_1_new-works-brand-new-theater-untested-works
I would argue that when an AD producing commercial theatre wants every aspect of ownership and drowns out small theatres it is a form of forced domination/extinction. Not cool.
Cutting edge, storefront, small theatres need respect, protection, and some kind of support system that will keep the bullies at bay. Better yet, will change the paradigm so that bully doesn’t even enter the brain.
I hope that yesterday’s launch is just the beginning of a much needed extended dialogue/paradigm shift. The wisdom in this town is immense and it’s rooted in lifetime after lifetime of experience. I thought Sabrina brought up a great point about the diversity in this town as well. There should be representation of that and this idea of critical mass definitely needs to be clarified.
The perception that equity delineation means one side is inferior is not how I’m receiving this at all. There has been an ever widening chasm between the commercial theatre’s and the rest of us. I don’t think that relationship needs to be adversarial.
I think the delineation will help articulate the distinction in production budgets. Judges will understand that they should expect pyrotechnics and that one pair of boots will be the cost of an entire Venus production in the commercial world. The cost of parking will be a Venus ticket price and the carpet in the lobby will be lush. Bells and whistles provided.
Those of us working with bodies, voices, and text will be viewed as such. With all production elements supporting the writing and work discovered in the rehearsal room. Parking is free. We’re lucky to have a lobby. And writers will fly themselves in from all over the country just to see the birth of their brainchild. It’s VERY different.
My greatest hope is that this understanding will lead to more funding streams for new work and not a kind of drying up as we’ve been experiencing.
Very hopeful!