Unbelievable

Did anyone notice that the Lucille Lortel awards revoked Daniel Fish's nomination for Paradise Park, and gave it to Annie Dorsen? Not that I don't think Ms. Dorsen deserves it, she is awesome, but was it necessary to snatch back Fish's nomination?

This just baffles me. It makes everyone look bad - especially the Lortel awards. Why not just say "oops, please add Annie Dorsen to the list"? It's not like they have to give the award to Fish just because he's nominated. And wow, I would hate to be Annie Dorsen in this situation.

And how did this happen in the first place? This is the kind of thing I would read over once or twice before I released it to the media. I would be really curious to know where this communication broke down - whether it was a press agent, or management, or what.

There must have been a better way to handle this. I don't get it.

Am I totally cynical if I think this is kind of lame?

Newsflash: MTC has announced an initiative to offer tickets for $30 to people under 30. These under-30-year-olds will have to log on to the MTC website and join a group or something.

I don't know about you, but for most of my under-30 life, $30 was like half of my weekly budget. I wouldn't even spend $30 on shoes.

Ok, I'm exaggerating a little. Why am I complaining? I'm such a crank.

On Bringing up the Rear

Do the words "America's Giving Challenge" ring a bell? Yes? No? The recent experiment/competition exploring how Web2.0 tools (blogs, social media, etc.) can be used for fundraising? That's detailed nicely in this New York Times Article?

Well, the winners were recently announced, and I noticed two really interesting trends in the results:
1. The winners are all tiny, grassroots organizations
2. No arts organizations!

Sean Stannard-Stockton of the Tactical Philanthropy blog goes over the America's Giving Challenge winners in this post, suggesting that small nonprofits are way ahead of larger companies in terms of adopting these new tools. Well, he's right - for example, the United Way used a Superbowl commercial to announce a campaign using text messaging as a tool for rescue workers. Good for the United Way! But excuse me, where are the arts?

Bringing up the rear, as usual.

I'll admit, it's hard to warm up to some of these Web2.0 resources... like Twitter, which seems like possibly the most annoying thing anyone ever thought of. But then again, I thought YouTube seemed pretty annoying until someone pointed me in the direction of some deeply weird old public access clips. Even Twitter shows some promise when applied to common problems in our community. Maybe Twitter might be helpful in sharing leads for jobs, internships, auditions, or calls for submissions? Or actors trying to sublet their apartments while they go out of town? Or sharing micro-reviews of performances and readings?

These resources are free, and the people who use them are young, smart, and savvy - exactly the demographic every arts manager is desperately trying to recruit. There's more to this problem than creating a Facebook page, or starting a blog (although those are good steps in the right direction). Wouldn't you want to be the person who cracked this one open?

In the meantime, here are some theatre-type Web2.0 resources:

Slideshare is by far the nerdiest Web2.0 application, which makes it by default my favorite. It's like YouTube for Powerpoint-type slideshows... but I promise, it is fascinating and amazing. I recommend this presentation on how the Web is transforming arts organizations.

TCG challenges theatres to make a 3-minute video about their companies

This is Cool... and Kind of Weird

In today's edition of Oddball Theatre News, the Seattle Shakespeare Company and the Wooden O Theatre Company have decided to "merge their nonprofit operations", as reported in the Seattle Times.

What's going on over there? Is this an example of Big Shakespeare Company eats Little Shakespeare Company, or is something much, much cooler happening?

The number of nonprofits (and specifically nonprofit arts organizations) continues to grow at an exponential rate (click here for an excellent report on this phenomenon). Many new companies have a hard time distinguishing themselves, and for good reason. How many new companies have you heard of that are "dedicated to new work" or "dedicated to supporting the emerging artist"? What does that even mean?

To be clear, I'm not hating on companies that say they want to support new work, or support emerging artists. There is no nobler mission, in my opinion. And I'm not saying MTC and the Roundabout should get married because they do basically the same thing. (Let's be honest, they do.) I'm just totally fascinated by the idea that two similar theater companies could look at each other, see two sides of the same mirror, and decide that they would be better off working together.

Lyn Gardner on Producing

I am truly, madly, deeply devoted to Lyn Gardner's theatre coverage in the Guardian, and my ardor deepens with her current blog posting, "Producers are theatre's true champions".

I mean, how's this for a clear-eyed perspective:

These producers are not just supporting projects, booking tours and raising money but also providing the creative spark that brings particular artists together and actually initiates projects. Their work is artist-centred and does not diminish the role of the artist but actually enhances and enables it.

I think it's often hard to see producers/managers as anything other than nasty gatekeepers... which sometimes true, and sometimes way off the mark. But I think we've all known a few really great managers - people you feel totally comfortable talking to, and you feel confident that whatever you say or ask will be heard, and addressed fairly. People who are genuinely excited just to make art possible.

A Lesson in Grant Writing from the Editorial Staff of the Onion

Want a free lesson in grant writing? The philanthropy desk at the Onion writes a near-perfect request for funding... for a fictional pole-vaulting foundation.

A friend once told me her singing coach regularly advised her to mimic how she thought an opera star would sound in order to sing well. This little article makes me wonder wonder if that approach could work for grant writing - write something you think is so outlandishly over-the-top in order to hit the mark.

Anyway, here's a quote from the article... it's very, very funny.

The statistics are sobering. Studies have shown that less than 5 percent of the poorest urban youth have adequate pole-vaulting facilities. Sadly enough, many schoolchildren have never even pole-vaulted at all, and less than 1 percent go on to pursue a career in pole-vaulting after leaving school. By comparison, 9 percent of American college students have received some exposure to the valuable character-building experience that sprinting full speed, stopping suddenly, and then elevating many feet into the air due to altered angular momentum around a fulcrum can be.

I. Love. This. Essay

David Cote gets it 100% right over at Time Out New York.

It would be my wildest wish to send any discussion of contemporary theatre in this direction. Positive, thoughtful, hopeful.

Three cheers!