• Home Page
  • About this website
  • Biography
  • Dr. B's Notes
  • Contact
Richard S. Beam

184     Awards, Award Shows, etc.

8/26/2020

0 Comments

 
I see that the nominations for this year's Emmy Awards were announced in late July, immediately creating controversy over the small number of Latinx people who were nominated for an award this year.  I'm sorry if I seem to lack sensitivity, but I think this "outrage" is stupid!  I have previously made some comments as to how I feel about "awards" for theatrical work (onstage and in the wings) as well as in motion pictures and television in posts #32 & #143 in the archives of this blog, so I will try not to rehash those ideas too much.  Still, I am moved to comment about this sort of controversy because I suspect that it is exactly what such awards were actually intended to create.  After all, controversy breeds interest; and interest sells tickets.  And selling tickets (in whatever form) is what the entertainment BUSINESS is all about.
 
Now I'm not going to just pick on the Emmys.  I think that that same basic motivations, and the yearly controversies over which individuals or groups got the "correct" number of nominations in the "correct" categories is true of all the major entertainment awards.  The award presentations are then followed by the yearly controversies over who was "properly" given the award after the usually rather dreary ceremonials which consist, mostly, of  "I'm so surprised...." speeches which have, in most cases, been carefully written out in advance and consist mostly of "thanking" everyone in sight.  Apparently, nobody is supposed to pick up on the idea that the recipient is suggesting that they had no real responsibility for the work being rewarded.  Of course, given the "team" nature of theatre, television, motion pictures, etc., it is, in fact true that the best individual work is unlikely to be recognized as outstanding without appropriate support from the rest of the cast and the crew.
 
But we insist on having individual awards for the "BEST" this or that, despite the somewhat legendary (and seemingly quite true) situation that winning an individual award (especially for acting) may be quite damaging to one's career as it is immediately assumed that a winner will immediately demand greater payment than they would have prior to the award, making them too expensive to even consider for other work.  I'm told that that isn't always the case, as even winners need/wish/want to continue working, but the belief in its truth remains.
 
I think one should recognize that these awards really serve, primarily, as marketing tools.  Many projects are timed so that they are likely to have just been widely seen right before the nominations for the various awards are made, and so that they can enjoy an additional burst of box office sales by getting nominated, and then another such burst if the project actually gains awards.  One doesn't have to be a Wharton graduate to see that being an "award-winning" anything is highly desirable from a marketing perspective.
 
Then, there's the problem of choosing the nominees and, ultimately, the winners.  Each sort of award has its own process for accomplishing this and all seem to make efforts to be fair and open as to the methodology used.  But, at least in recent years, every year there is controversy because some group expresses some dismay because THEIR group didn't get its "proper" share of nominations and/or awards.  I'd suggest that this is a fundamental flaw in the basic idea of such awards and will continue until we, as a society, either 1.) accept that such activities are unlikely to be viewed as "fair" to all in every case on every occasion; or 2.) that some sort of quota system will have to be established so that the "right percentage of the "right people are assured of winning.  This idea, of course, will also prove unsatisfactory to virtually everyone unless every possible category is recognized, and all quotas are fulfilled.  Then we can argue about how the quotas are "unfair."
 
I am reminded a bit of the problem of the assignment of grades, which I see as a somewhat similarly difficult process. 
Picture
Grades, except in the case of multiple-choice and True-False questions (probably the least valuable sort of information in the long run) almost always come down to a matter of opinion, just as awards in the arts do.  Most teachers who I have known are aware of that and try very hard to be as fair and unbiased as possible.  Still, if we are honest, complete objectivity is unlikely to be possible.  That really shouldn't be surprising.  Human beings do have emotional responses and a "good" discussion of an essay/discussion question or problem which is well-written, straightforward and easy to follow may very well get a better grade than a "better" factual treatment which is poorly spelled, ungrammatical, and difficult to follow simply because the former is more pleasing than the latter.  I will admit that I may have been guilty of this, because when you have 30 papers to grade, it's a relief to find one which is a pleasure to read, so it's likely to be rewarded, perhaps more highly that it might have been under other circumstances.
 
Of course, there's also the question of "grade inflation", something administrators often say they deplore.  Then we see things like this ad I ran across in the local paper around graduation time this year.
Picture
Okay. So, Creighton University ran an ad to congratulate its new alums.  Big deal.  But, did you notice the little section at the bottom of the ad?
Picture
Now unless they have an unusual grading system, if The Class of 2020 had a 3.5 GPA, then the "average grade" was a "B+."  My sense is that they are trying to argue that their university is a bit like Lake Wobegon where "... all the children are above average." 
 
Creighton IS a fully accredited, nationally known university which is tied for 104th rank among "National Universities" by U.S. News.  One would guess that admission is pretty competitive.  So, it's not unreasonable to assume the Creighton students are more talented, dedicated, etc., than the run-of-the-mill average across the country.  Given that, I would suggest that one could reasonably expect that the Creighton faculty might well expect a higher standard from their students than might be expected from those who attend Blankenty State.  In fact, I would suggest that, if grades must be assigned, they, like awards, should be assigned based on the quality of the work presented given the competition present.  
 
It's a little like the situation I observed with some frequency in the Theatre program at Western.  The incoming freshman actor might have been used to playing lead roles in his/her local theatre at home, but that didn't mean that they could expect to successfully compete with more advanced students at Western immediately.  Director's should cast the person they feel is the best qualified to play the role from the talent and skill level available.  For those new students, the competition had changed, and they had to demonstrate that they could hold their own under these, changed circumstances.  The same thing happened to our students when they graduated.  The competition changed when they tried to work somewhere else (grad school or professional work), so they had to demonstrate that they could compete successfully in these new groups.
 
Grades are a bit like that.  I would assume that a "B+" from a school like Creighton probably should suggest a higher standard of work than the same grade from, say, Western, or many other schools.  Bragging that a 3.5 GPA is the "average" only suggests that our grading system is inflated because "Our" students are superior to the peons at other schools.  I would argue that that also suggests a degree of arrogance which I find in poor taste and suggests a sort of complacent stupidity which I find aggravating and amusing, but all too common among college/university administrative personnel.  
 
An example of such administrative arrogance shows up in the picture below, which I discovered on the home page of Western's website a few years back.

Picture
Now I know that Western's web PR folks thought they had an interesting picture to help promote the then newly created School of Stage and Screen.  And, I assume they thought the accompanying text would provide motivation for prospective students to be attracted to it.
 
However, having spent a considerable time working with stage lights, I do not find the idea of showing a bare-handed technician working on obviously illuminated lighting fixtures with the suggestion that one should "Grab" a "white-hot spotlight" to suggest any real understanding of the nature of stage technology, at least at the time this picture was taken.  If the line had been rewritten to say, for example: "The white-hot spotlight: Take your place in its light on stage in WCU's new School of Stage and Screen" along with a picture of someone standing onstage in a pool of light while "performing," I wouldn't have a problem with it.  However, the picture is, obviously likely to appeal most to "techies" and I doubt that suggesting that lighting technicians should "grab white-hot spotlights" with their bare hands is likely to attract the sort of prospective "techies" that I would want in my program.  Needless to say, my opinion regarding the use of this picture and text was not consulted before its use.  I confess that I found this embarrassing, but I'm quite sure that administrative folk thought it quite clever.
 
As many of my students know, I was never very fond of Western's tradition of having student "awards" paralleling those used for Broadway and/or motion pictures.  I don't believe that the educational experience is about awards.  I believe that such things almost always degenerate into "who has the most friends" and "what category can we put 'so-and-so' in because she/he needs an award" awards.  If educational theatres are going to have awards, I believe that they should be based on who has contributed the most, who has grown the most as a performer/technician/student, etc.
 
One of my own proudest achievements was being awarded the "Outstanding Freshman" award and then, later in my undergraduate career, a "Theatre Award Scholarship" by the Faculty of the theatre program at Indiana during my undergraduate years there,  These awards weren't a plaque or trophy, just a very modest "scholarship" towards my tuition for the next year.  I think, maybe it was $100.  But I was singled out for "doing good" by people I respected who had the entire body of undergraduate Theatre students to pick from.  
 
Oh, well, awards will be given, tickets will be sold based on them and people will complain about how this or that person or group was not given their "fair share" of nominations and awards.  I find the whole thing a bit distasteful and further proof that most of these awards are valued, primarily, for their commercial importance.  I think that's too bad.  To me, 
Schroeder has it right.  
Picture
The arts are worthwhile because they give us joy and, hopefully, also give it to others.  Awards, it seems to me, are really beside the point (although they can help sell tickets).
 
See you in a couple of weeks.
 
LLAP,
 
Dr. B
0 Comments

183   COVID Could Be Worse -- Remember Salem

8/12/2020

0 Comments

 
Each year when August rolls around, I am reminded of how bad things really can get within a society.  This is because, 328 years ago this month, a bunch of people in Salem, Massachusetts, decided that an ancestor of mine (along with a number of other people) was guilty of "witchcraft" and that the "correct" thing to do was to hang her "by the neck until dead."  Which they then went out and did on August 19, 1692.  To me, this provides us with a picture of how low human society can get.  Yes, I deplore slavery, anti-Semitism, and any other form of discrimination which one can think of.  And, certainly Americans have been guilty of many, many varieties of these sorts of behavior focused on whichever group(s) our society had decided to pick on at that particular moment.  
 
I think this is why I have a problem with those who feel that some economic and personal sacrifice is too much to pay for the health of us all.  After all, I would argue, what about the wide variety of laws and regulations which have been adopted in an effort to "...promote the General Welfare,"?  These would include: “No Shirt; no Shoes; no Service“ laws; speed limits and other traffics restrictions; airport security restrictions; "Blue" laws and other regulations restricting business hours and practices; laws REQUIRING the removal of snow from sidewalks (which are on our, personal property!); etc.  Certainly, such laws inhibit one's freedom to behave as they might wish.  Yet I don't see many people demanding the "right" to some sort of "absolute" personal freedom in those situations.  Yet, requiring a mask and/or social distancing is said to be an offense against "Constitutionally protected rights," according to some people.  Read the Preamble, people.  It says that the Constitution was written to establish a government "... to promote the general Welfare...."  It seems to me that that could be construed to allow requiring masks to help keep citizens alive.
 
I confess a certain desire to suggest to some of the "never maskers" that if it's YOUR "right" to endanger me, is it not MY "right" to apply a Second Amendment solution to protect me from your actions?  Somehow, I see some logic here, although I really don't favor that as a wise course of action.
 
I'm not happy to be mask-wearing, isolating, "social distancing," etc., but I accept that my rights end where they interfere with yours.  If I have a "right" to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," so do I.  If you wish to endanger me by refusing to engage in a bit of preventive social action, I have the right (established in the Declaration of Independence) to suggest that the government should enact laws to protect me from you.  
 
It does NOT include, in my opinion, the right of political leaders to force us to conform to THEIR ideas of desirable behavior through the use of the military, however.  I'm dating myself, but I remember the Kent State University massacre when National Guard troops fired on civilians protesting the expansion of the Vietnam War into Cambodia and managed to kill some people who were just walking across the campus to go to class.  Violence as a part of protest is not good, but neither is it acceptable as a means of stopping/preventing legitimate protest, especially by the military.  But enough of this political philosophy.  
​
Strangely enough, there IS the possibility of some humor in the current pandemic.  To me, this is what separates the current situation from what happened in Salem.  I can't find any humor in that situation, which was a REAL witch-hunt, as was the McCarthy era.  
 
As some of my lighting design students may remember, I sometimes used Edward Hopper's Nighthawks as an example for them to figure out how to create lighting effects.  I'd tell them to, "Turn the picture into a floorplan, then make that a light plot for the purpose of recreating the picture."  Most found it a challenge.  I thought it a valuable exercise.  If you don't know the picture I'm referring to, here it is from the Art Institute of Chicago website:
Picture
My brother-in-law shared this version from The New Yorker by Jason Adam Katzenstein, who adapted the painting for masks and "social distancing."
Picture
Or, a bit more grimly, there's this version which I saw in The Economist.
Picture
One of the more interesting developments of surviving the pandemic, at least to me, has been my discovery that we can, in fact, "socialize" on a wider scale than email.  No, I still do not do Facebook or Twitter.  My experience with this has been via Zoom meetings of the Omaha Sherlockian Society.  I gather that there are other, similar apps available, but Zoom seems to be what people are talking (and cartooning) about.  
 
On the other hand, Thatababy pointed out that one can TRY to cheat on Zoom business meetings, but it IS possible to get caught,
Picture
Between Friends, on the other hand, was, I felt, quite eloquent about the rules for appropriate dress, etc. while "Zooming."
Picture
The possibilities are endless, and amusing, at least to me.
 
I, obviously, find the whole "anti-mask" thing a demonstration of the fact that one should "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."  After all, if it is true that following the advice of public health experts to wear a mask is certain to kill these people because "they can't breathe!"; I am forced to wonder how is it that the medical staff who routinely wear such devices during (sometimes lengthy) surgery, etc., manage to survive to operate again?  It does make me wonder if some of these "anti-maskers" are just selfish jerks who don't want to have to worry about having any social responsibility.  After all, "If you get sick, what do I care?  And if I get sick, you'll take care of me, won't you?"
 
I know it won't be done (nor should it be) but I am tempted to suggest that, if people who refuse to wear masks, social distance, etc. get sick; then they should be denied medical treatment because they have purposely engaged in behavior which is dangerous to society as a whole, not just to themselves.  After all, we put people who engage in other endangering behaviors in prison, perhaps they all should just be allowed to "... decrease the surplus population," since they have demonstrated their unwillingness to participate in responsible social behavior.  Even this, however, can be approached with a modicum of humor, from the just amusing, to the somewhat serious.
 
Non Sequitur seems to take the idea of "masking up" with a degree of seriousness.
Picture
On the other hand, Mike Luckovich, the cartoonist, has used the current situation to suggest that education may need to take a hand in resolving this situation, at least for the future.
Picture
I will admit, however, that for many people, this staying at least semi-isolated can be something of a concern.  Personally, I have done a LOT of reading (and re-reading) from my all-too-extensive library of all sorts of stuff, but I will admit that it IS getting tiring.  My library, however, has helped me survive the "vast wasteland" which still makes up a large amount of television.  Somehow, having a couple of hundred channels providing a greater amount of the same sort of junk that we use to get on fewer than a dozen (yes, I AM dating myself!) really isn't a vast improvement.  I still find it easier to "escape" into a good book, although that has been hampered by tight restrictions on the local public libraries.  Thank heaven for my shelves full of books.
 
Remember, it still COULD be worse:

Picture
Or, for those of you who watch television:
Picture
Eventually, of course, this too will pass, as did the "trials" in Salem.  There have already been many more deaths from COVID-19 than there were in Salem, but at least we aren't pretending that COVID deaths are some form of "justice."  At least, not yet.
 
If we think that heroism only occurs on the battlefield, we should save some thoughts for those who leave their homes, families and safety every day to go off to risk their lives to fight this disease and to provide essential services for the rest of us.  Real courage is going out every day knowing that you are endangering your own life in order to prevent others from dying.  Those who won't put up with some inconvenience because they insist that "I'm not going to get sick, so I don't have to worry about spreading it to others." are NOT worthy of being part of "We, the People...."
 
LLAP,
 
Dr. B
 
P.S.   Wear a mask, practice social distancing, respect the lives of others, be informed, register, VOTE!  If you don't accept the responsibilities of citizenship, you don't deserve the privilege of being a citizen.
0 Comments

    Just personal comments about things which interest me (and might interest others).

    Archives

    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly