I've long been on the warpath against competitive awards in the arts. There's just no objective way to gauge that one person or thing is "better" than another. It's all opinion, even if it's based on a vote; it's still one group of opinions versus another.
The only awards system that ever worked, as far as I was concerned, was Los Angeles's Drama-Logue Awards. The Drama-Logue was the essential weekly paper for anyone in the performing arts in L.A. in the 70s and 80s (even into the 90s), with casting notices, reviews, gossip, and the annual awards. Each critic was allowed to give out as many (or as few) awards as they thought were warranted, so the year-end issue had literally hundreds of winners. (It's why I had to laugh when I saw a show in London in 1993 and one of the actors -- an American from Los Angeles playing an American [in the days when that was allowed] included winning a Drama-Logue Award in his bio; it was the equivalent of saying he was listed in the phone book.) While there were, frankly, too many awards for them to be taken really seriously, they were generally an acknowledgment of good work in all areas, and not limited to five finalists, of whom one was the "best." The idea never caught on, though, because we apparently need to be told there are clear winners and losers, even if that kind of assessment is impossible. --Dave Sikula On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 6:27:28 AM UTC-7 Bob Jersey wrote: > "Is there a deeper political and social bias in the infrastructure of > recognizing art?" Spoiler alert, writes Kareem: > https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/kareem-abdul-jabbar-awards-season-1234961078/ > (link) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/92273c2f-9d88-40af-9131-66f42a2f67ddn%40googlegroups.com.
