The Great Theatrical Gong ShowDate: 28 February 2005
The annual merry-go-round of theatrical backslapping reached its zenith this week with the Oliviers presentation. But what do they – as well as the Standard, Critics’ Circle & our own Whatsonstage.com Awards, now in their fifth year – actually mean?
Last night (Sunday 20 February 2005), the "Daddy" of British theatre prizes, the Laurence Olivier Awards, gave out its gongs at a star-studded ceremony at the London Hilton (See Also Today's News). That followed the, widely divergent, results of the Critics’ Circle and our own Whatsonstage.com Theatregoers’ Choice Awards, now in their fifth year, both announced at the beginning of February and, way back in November when they celebrated their illustrious 50th anniversary, the favours bestowed by London newspaper, the Evening Standard.
Throw in various other arts accolade with theatrical nods - such as the Variety Club, South Bank Show and Time Out Awards – and, however you look at it, it’s a busy old schedule.
Who cares & does it matter?
Naturally, it depends on your point of view. If you aren't nominated and you don't win then, of course, awards are a trivial bit of fun. But, if you are in the running for a prize, things become a little more serious. Press an actor or director who professes to be "only doing it for the art", and you'll likely as not get an acknowledgement that it feels good to be recognised by one's peers or public.
However, unlike the Oscars, where a win can quantifiably add millions to a flagging film's fortunes, the economic benefit of theatre awards is hard to gauge. Often the winner's run has closed before the presentation but, if any of the prizes provide increased impetus to a show's marketing and encourage new audiences to seek them out, they have to be seen as a good thing.
With such a spate of ceremonies and announcements, we can be thankful each of the major awards has its own characteristics and idiosyncrasies to keep them all from looking a little "me too".
Trial by Public
Unashamedly starting with our own little contribution, the Whatsonstage.com Theatregoers’ Choice Awards make no excuses for putting the views of the ticket-buying pubic, en masse, at the head of the queue.
Yes, this approach is always open to criticism and, God forbid, populism in the roster of victors but then, ultimately, shows stand or fall based on what the public is prepared to part with cash for, not what people who are given their tickets for free think about them.
From humble beginnings five years ago, our Theatregoers' Choice Awards have established themselves and so they should (in our obviously biased opinion!). This year 11,000 people took the time to vote for their favourite shows, performers and creative team members, in addition to the 2,000 who participated in the much more arduous nominations phase (See News, 1 Feb 2005).
Keeping Up Standards
The Evening Standard Theatre Awards have the longest pedigree but also have the greatest mystique. A small voting panel of professional critics, including the Standard's own hard-to-please Nicholas de Jongh, have always determined the choices here.
The winners are informed of their status in advance of the ceremony, this year held at the National Theatre (See News, 13 Dec 2004), so there isn't much in the way of surprise for the nominees. Entertainingly, though, the paper publishes a report, the day after the awards, of the panel discussion and voting by which the winners emerged.
While only productions seen in London are considered, the panel doesn't restrict itself to arbitrary divisions of London theatre into West End, Off West End and Fringe and generously includes what it considers to be the capital's best theatre, no matter the venue.
As for the timing, a cynic may think it has more to do with the newspaper needing to free up the spring for the more glamorous Evening Standard Film Awards. But, who knows, there may be an unexplained logic to why an awards event to celebrate the year in theatre is hosted before the year is over.
The Critics' Circle
The Critics' Circle is the corduroy blazer with leather elbow patches of the awards calendar (See News, 1 Feb 2005). The perception (if not the reality) is of a rather stuffy gathering of intellectuals, which has been dishing out plaudits regularly since 1989.
Done by a free vote amongst all its members nationwide, critics are invited to vote in nine categories. These include the usual categories for Best New Play and Musical (New or Revival), Best Actor, Actress, Director and Designer.
The Critics' Circle, though, was also the first to recognise the importance of giving separate awards to the most promising playwright and most promising newcomer (other than a playwright), and to have a separate award for Best Shakespearean Performance.
Larry's Still the Daddy
Whatever the change in fortunes of awards events and their popularity – and even despite the fact that for the second year in a row and only the second time since their foundation, they will not be televised - there can be little argument that Larry is still the Daddy of theatre awards. Presented each spring by the Society of London Theatre (SOLT), the professional body that officially represents the interests of West End and affiliate members, are the Laurence Olivier Awards.
Originally set up in 1976 by the then Society of West End Theatre (SWET - you can appreciate the name change, surely), in 1984 these awards were renamed in honour of England's most celebrated stage actor, Sir Laurence Olivier, and their status improved.
Despite the Awards’ importance, over the past decade, the BBC did an increasingly effective job of shuffling the Oliviers into the scheduling equivalent of a broom cupboard for the last few years, until last year, they abandoned their coverage altogether. That shameful development, repeated this year, starves the industry of a much-needed national showcase of why theatre is still relevant.
The upside to the lack of TV support is that, from an on-the-hop weekday lunchtime event, the award ceremony format has reverted back to a glamorous Sunday evening affair. Great for Olivier contenders and other industry guests lucky enough to be invited, not so great for anyone else passionate about theatre and left out in the cold.
Whatever the format, the Oliviers remain as predictably unpredictable as ever. With long-list input from SOLT members, the awards are decided by an invited jury of professional experts in conjunction with members of the public who apply for the task (and are appointed after a selection interview). The judges see only the shows opened in eligible West End houses that have actually put themselves forward for nomination.
The sadness of the Oliviers is that they only represent those shows put on in the West End and ignore many great works at venues further a field (admittedly, as membership shifts, it can be hard to figure out who is and isn’t eligible for what). SOLT would argue, legitimately, that it's a members’ club. Still, it is hard to see how such an event can be representative when some of London's most interesting producing spaces, such as the Almeida, don't qualify except in limited affiliate categories or for transfers.
Like 'em or loathe 'em?
Like 'em or loathe 'em, everyone enjoys winning an award. In a notoriously insecure profession, the approval of critics and judging panels, whoever they are, makes actors and other creators feel good about themselves. It can only be hoped that the announcement of an award, any award, helps to bring in a bigger audience to sample what the theatre at its best is all about.
Related Content
