I have nearly worn out this key on my MacBook over the last week or so.
I am attempting to be a kinder, gentler Big Bad Wolf.
I have written and deleted roughly three blog entries of varying length and tone regarding the Henry Awards -- specifically the tendency to refer to them as "the Denver Tonys" or the "Colorado Tonys."
Sometimes I wasn't nice, sometimes I was, but I could not reconcile how to express my dismay over the selection and voting process without in some way diminishing the worthiness of the artists nominated -- many some of the most talented people I know and many people I consider to be friends.
I am thrilled and proud for them in their being acknowledged for their mastery and talent, and I believe it to be much deserved.
At the same time, I wish that our "Denver Tonys" were a little more inclusive, and that the Colorado Theatre Guild's acknowledgement extended a little further into Colorado.
I know that a plan is in place to make things equitable for next year -- the same plan that was discussed just about a year ago at this time but abandoned temporarily due to . . . well, I guess I'm not entirely sure that I understand -- something about it being too difficult to implement in time for the next (this) cycle. So, with the 2008-2009 Henry nominees announced and all shows opening subsequent to that announcement being part of the next (2009-2010) cycle, does that mean that the new system is in place? Now? Right now? Because new shows have opened.
Perhaps it is. I may not be in the loop on this one. Somebody let me know.
And here I am typing many of the things again that I had deleted earlier in the week. I feel that I have been spurred on a bit by John Moore's able handling of this subject in his most recent column.
Again, I don't wish to take anything away from the nominees, yet I suppose I can't be critical of the process without doing that just a little bit. I apologize to the nominated artists for this, it is not my intent.
I think, too, that apologies ought to be afforded to those artists who could not be nominated for geographical reasons or who had little chance of being nominated by virtue of only being seen by a minority of "the nine" under the present system. I'd make that apology myself, but it is not mine to make.
John, as usual, has said it better than I could have, and he will no doubt catch a lot less flack than I know that I am going to after I hit the "publish" button on this post, so I urge you to read his column this week, and see why John and I are in agreement that, (as John puts it) "until the Guild solves its many inherent logistical problems, it has no business touting the Henrys as 'Colorado's Tony Awards' (especially when they aren't statewide)."
Oh, a few of you have asked if I'm going to the Henry awards, and I suspect that a few more of you will be asking once this blog makes its usual rounds.
The answer is . . . I haven't decided.