Smoking Ban May Now Include Your Apartment
Access-A-Ride Nailed by Local News
Giuliani Livid Over Bringing 9/11 Trials to NYC
House Cat Terrorizes Family In Dramatic Hostage Situation
Oreo The Dog Is Dead, Blame Game Is Not
With the Tony nominations announced yesterday, everyone is buzzing about Wicked (this year's uneven and "quirky" Tony story; will Kristen and Idina cancel each other out?), Bombay Dreams (a little Andrew Lloyd Webber Schadenfreude), how Puffy wasn't nominated but the three other actresses all were (when you get "meh" reviews, what does he expect - this isn't the MTV Video Music Awards) and how hunky Hugh Jackman is...and they talk about how the Times's public editor, Daniel Okrent, is totally off his rocker. Okrent wrote an article about how the Tonys are "artistically meaningless, blatantly commercial, shamefully exclusionary and culturally corrosive award competition," proving that Okrent has lived in a plastic bubble his whole life, having never been subject to any awards show of any kind. Really, his argument is that the Times will give the Tonys more coverage, than, say, the Golden Globes, and that's not a good deal for readers. Gothamist can sort of see Okrent's point, but we feel if the Times is non-NYC's glimpse into NYC, and if the Tonys can bring attention to theater overall, then it's cool if the Times wants to over-cover the gayest night of the year. Gothamist looks forward to seeing Hugh Jackman host the Tony Awards ceremony again, on June 6.
Superfluities has a point about the Broadway versus Off-Broadway schism, but the Variety article points out that Off-Broadway doesn't want anything to do with Broadway and vice versus because of unions (not getting into the psychological desire of theater folk "making it" on Broadway). For the record, Gothamist's favorite in the Tony race is Avenue Q. Puppets in the big city, puppets who like Internet porn, Gary Coleman as a landlord, Bad News Bears... that's why Broadway was created! Gothamist on Avenue Q. But there are tons of great plays and musical out there - both on Broadway and off. Check out theater information from TKTS (for half-price Broadway shows) and Off Broadway Online.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I read the Okrent column on Sunday and I was floored. I ran with the emotion of the article at the time, not so much thinking that the Tonys were purposefully biased but more unabashedly commercial. I was disappointed in the system for a few minutes.
I've since read the Variety article that covered the story, and I can see where Okrent had some big holes in his argument. Surely, if non-journalists can come up with such effective counterpoints against a seasoned pro, it really does look bad.
That isn't to say that he doesn't have any valid complaints underneath all of the bile-spewing... there is, certainly, an issue of smaller productions not getting due credit because of the money monopoly on the big theaters and the awards that cover them. However, Okrent, you're a big boy, I'm sure that as a talented writer and thoughtful individual, you could help address this issue without being a shrew and trying to steal away some of the Broadway glitz. If you really have an issue with this, there are many outlets that would publish your opinion, whether it is supportive of underpublicized shows (preferred) or highly critical of the performance community/awards that may have too much publicity.
My biggest question: why take a chance and mar your reputation as the Times' public editor - a role that you've performed very well so far - by thinly veiling an off-topic rant with an attack on the Arts and Leisure department? Skip the rant and suggest a positive solution. You could have made the same argument - provide balanced coverage of theater arts, even if it's at the expense of the quantity of Tonys' coverage - without going after any sacred cows in an aggressive and ill-placed manner. That sort of discussion technique - attack the gods to shock the followers and get their attention - is not what I'd like to see in the Times.
I agree - Okrent undermined the thoughtful parts of his article with a little insanity. Like it or not, Broadway, the glitzy part of it, is an American institution. There may be more challenging work coming from other places, but Broadway attracts, employs, and thrills hundreds of thousands. It's an industry - of course it's not perfect, there are tons of things that Broadway producers would like to change, too, but this argument is off base - does he want to attack the city for making Times Square more readily commercial? A weird issue.
Gary Coleman is the Super in Ave Q, not the landlord.
It's the Bad Idea Bears, not the Bad News Bears. I saw my life on stage in their persona. Well, if they merged into one...