A Candid Conversation About Awards Shows (Tonys, I’m looking at you)

Everyone in the theater world has a soft spot in their heart for the Tonys. It’s the way most of us first got to experience Broadway. I remember Tony night being as big a deal in my home as the Super Bowl is in others. We would plan a special day, make a wonderful dinner with fantastic deserts, get comfy in front of the T.V. and watch from beginning to end. It was life-changing getting to see the performances, often of shows I’d never heard of, which blew my mind with one song. I even remember the days when plays were given a slot to perform.

Just as important as the Tonys viewing was the next day's trip to Barnes and Noble to buy (or order) a copy of the plays and cast albums from the shows I had been so taken with. This is how I would discover the writers who would shape me, shows that appeared like beacons from a distant land, touching my heart, and changing my paradigm of what was possible in the theater.

Now, I don’t really watch the Tonys. Don’t get me wrong, for years as an adult, I fully planned on taking the night off and settling in to support my fellow artists. I’ve now gotten to personally attend the Tonys and was honored to do so. When I became a part of the Broadway world myself, the Tonys didn’t lose their glimmer – in fact, they took on a new sheen. I might be more familiar with the nominated shows now than I was growing up – often having seen them multiple times, sometimes through various incarnations, and frequently as a direct part of them myself. It now feels not like watching a magical, far away land, but like I’m rooting for the home team. It’s quite a special thing the first time someone you know and cares about wins a Tony. When you get to text them as they’re making their acceptance speech “YAY! I’m so proud of you!”

And yet, every time I watch the Tonys, my heart dies a little. Now, I really don’t end up watching it at all. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll watch performances and speeches on YouTube the next day, but despite feeling like I really ought to tune in to “boost ratings” and support my industry, I know that if I do, I’ll be left angry and depressed by the end of the night.

And I’m not alone. Many Broadway professionals I know feel the same way. We just don’t really want to talk about it. It would feel a little like being traitors to our industry.

But what took that joy away was not being “in the world,” it wasn’t being familiar with the shows -  it’s the fact that it’s become more and more blatantly obvious that what originally drew us all to the Tonys, to all awards shows in fact, actually has very little to do with what’s really going on on that stage. The Tonys are supposed to celebrate theater, to share what we do with the world, and honor those who have created masterful work over the course of the year.

But it’s become utterly, transparently obvious that that’s not what the Tonys or pretty much any awards show is about.

It’s about politics.

And sometimes it feels like we’re not even trying to pretend anymore that it’s not.

Let me tell you a story. I will not use the actual names of shows as this is not about calling anyone out. I also want to go on record and say that I can’t verify this story with any hard proof. But it is known to most in the industry. And, even assuming that it’s not accurate, it is true enough regarding the politics of awards shows that it serves as a general example.

First, some context:

Tony voters, again, like most awards shows, are made up of people in the industry. Yes, this includes a wide array of people and generally includes those who have won a Tony before. But it is primarily made up of producers or, if not singularly producers, those who have a vested financial interest in the success or failure of various projects. The real goal of the Tonys is not to inspire the next generation, or celebrate our industry…it’s a giant commercial for shows to make more money.

Now, that’s not a bad thing in and of itself. For example, Jonathan Groff spoke in the recent documentary “Those You’ve Known” (about the creation of the original production of “Spring Awakening”) about how the Tonys is quite literally what saved the show and kept it running. Hey, the Tonys were directly responsible for my buying all those play scripts and cast albums, and would have gotten me to buy tickets if I’d been in a position to do so.

But it’s not treated as an equal opportunity commercial. For example, shows have to pay to be on the Tonys. That’s right! If you’re offered a performance slot (and that’s a big if – remember the controversy a few years ago about certain worthy shows simply not being asked to perform? And other shows, such as cruise ship performances being given a slot? Absolutely nothing against cruise ship shows or the incredible people involved in them…but it didn’t really feel like there was any reason for them to be on the Tonys other than as a commercial for the cruise lines…) If nothing else you have to pay to bring sets, costumes, cast, and crew, etc. Some shows have more of a budget than others to do this at all, let alone in a way that will best show off their production. Remember when the revival of “Spring Awakening” had to crowdfund so they could afford to perform at the Tonys? Yes, they had closed prior to the awards show, but they were nominated for three awards that night, and it was a relatively small, cost-effective production. A show nominated across multiple categories had to crowdfund to even be able to perform…

So the “money people” are most motivated to put effort into shows that already have a big budget and the potential for mass commercial appeal. And those are usually the ones that are already ten steps ahead in terms of marketing anyway. And these “money people” are often the same people voting on the awards in the first place. Keep in mind, that most Broadway shows don’t really make money on Broadway – they make money on tours and licensing.

So, my story.

A while back there were two Broadway shows that were up for several Tonys each, including best musical. The first was a larger budget show, but one that had a lot of heart and broke new ground. It included a very talented, established team, several of whom had never officially been recognized by the Tonys (we’re talking something like a Julie Andrews situation (no, Julie Andrews has never won a Tony.) Just give it to them already! We don’t care what for! But this actually happens to be a great show so, yeah, this is your chance!)

The other show was smaller. It was controversial, but light and fun and had a good following. It was created by several newcomers who were clearly talented, but this was more a situation of “they’ve got a great career ahead of them” than “OMG give this show a Pulitzer!”

So both shows started their Tony campaigns.

Only, the smaller show did something no one had really done before.

Allegedly, they went around to producers, who were also Tony voters, and said “Hey, we have an unusual plan. We know our show isn’t going to do well touring. So we’re going to be the first show ever to, instead of touring, set up a sit-down production outside of NYC. We’re going to go straight to the audience we know will love us and skip all the places where we know this isn’t their cup of tea. And we’re going to make a TON of money. We still have some investor slots open if you want to get in on this. But keep in mind, this will only work if we win the Tony.”

Well, the Tony Awards came around, and, honestly, to everyone’s shock, this show swept. Even fans of the show were a bit: “I don’t know if they deserved all that…maybe the voters were just trying to “stick it to the man” and screw over the larger show just because it was the larger show?”

Well, the smaller show did just what they promised. They got a lot of new people on board financially (who came on before the Tonys, mind you,) and did a sit-down production…which flopped.

Now, take it as fact or a fable, what that story does point to is the fact that awards shows are really about promoting products that the voters are financially invested in. It’s not a celebration, it’s about making money. And guess what? Many Tony voters don’t even see everything that’s nominated. How is that in any way fair?

And yeah, we all get it. To a degree. Art is hard – we’ve got to sell our product however we’re able.

But to do that at the cost of the heart of our industry is a high price. And guess what? People can tell.

In the past few years some of the top articles surrounding awards shows have been:

“Award Shows Are Dying. Is That Such a Bad Thing?”

“The Death of Awards Shows: Do People no longer care?

“Why the Oscars and other awards shows are struggling?”

“Oscars so dead”

 “5 Reasons Why TV Viewers Don’t Give a Crap About Awards Shows”

 “…Is the Awards Show Officially Dead?”

 I would argue that awards shows in themselves aren’t dead, but politically driven commercials masquerading as comradery and celebrating achievement are dying fast. If I, in spite of wanting to support my community, in spite of the wonderful memories, still get a pit in my stomach when I think about watching the Tonys, something has gone horribly off the rails.  

Here are some things I think could help when moving forward with the Tonys in the future:

-      Make the voting process transparent. I don’t mean tell us who voted for what, I mean let us in on how the whole process works. Who are the voters? How are nominations determined? How does voting happen? This can be a fun and exciting way to let us in on the process. And it would also set up some framework for accountability. It’s hard to hide the fact that most voters have a financial stake in a show, or there are WAY more white voters than people of color, etc. if the public knows and understands what’s going on. And it might force things to become fairer in the process.

-      Don’t treat the Tonys like a commercial from start to finish – by that I mean don’t try to figure out what Joe Schmo who hates theater might tune in to and do that. It ends up turning everyone off. Focus on celebrating the shows and the winners. Let great work speak for itself. The truth is I think most people would rather see a moving moment from a play than another celebrity who has nothing to do with theater coming out to say a few words. If we want to see X celebrity we can jump on YouTube. We came to the Tonys to see something we can’t see anywhere else.

-      Stop cutting awards! At this point, SO many awards are given out before the actual telecast it feels pointless tuning in at all. Yes, I know some awards are for very specific jobs that not everyone in the world understands, but that could be a really cool opportunity to let us peek behind the scenes a bit. Instead, we feel like the actual winners don’t matter at all – and if that’s the case, what’s the point of an awards show?

-      Find a way to require, and check, that all voters have seen every show nominated in their category. If they missed one, they can’t vote.

-      Don’t allow anyone to vote in a category that features a show they have a vested financial interest in.

-    ’Let’s diversify the nominating committee and the voting pool.

-      Yeah, I’ll say it, let’s add more categories! – I’m sorry, time constraints is not a great excuse for shutting out incredibly important aspects of our industry. I’ll give just one example:

For years folks have been advocating for a “Best Ensemble” category. It’s a category that exists in other theater awards, but not for the Tonys. Why does it matter? Let’s look at “Six.” “Six” is an incredible show that’s made up of a cast of six women. Every performer has an equal role – so much so that the nominating committee determined that every single one of them was only eligible in the Leading Actress category. They are all so even and so crucial to the show that not a single one of them could be put in the Supporting Actress category (which, theoretically, would have made it possible for more than one performer to win, and more likely one of them would.) So what happened? What everyone expected. They were so equal they cancelled each other out, and now none of the brilliant queens of “Six” has a nomination. And their performances deserve to be recognized. This is a perfect example of where a Best Ensemble award is desperately needed. This show is 100% comprised of an ensemble of leading ladies. I find it ironic that in a show that is about women supporting women, none of them are being recognized because none of them stands out as being “more important.”

And that’s just one example. How about Best Casting? Separating Best Lyrics from Best Music (as they used to do.) And there are many more. Again, I get that time is an issue…but this is an industry of brilliant creatives. Surely we can figure out how to do this?

There’s been a worldwide disillusionment with institutions meant to celebrate achievement. This past Olympics was a giant nail in the coffin. I think we’ve all reached the point where we realize that the most deserving person isn’t the one rewarded, and if they are, it’s a happy coincidence. More and more it feels like people in positions of power are just using awards to push their personal agenda. It’s no wonder we’ve stopped watching.

I think we need to stop being afraid to question our awards shows for fear of being “traitors” to our industry. It seems for a long time we’re all just sort of supposed to shut up and support because our industry needs it. But the best way we can support our industry is to bring about meaningful change to rectify a situation that has gone off track.

We need to get back to the heart of what made awards shows like the Tonys so important. I’m not saying it was ever perfect by any means, but there is a heart that has largely gone out of it. Let’s show the world what’s truly great about Broadway – not give everyone another reason to think we’ve just become a theme park…