Helen Hayes Awards Process

There's been a lot of discussion in cyberspace following the Helen Hayes Awards nominations which were announced last Monday (2/28). I've seen the same outcome in the awards process occur every year since 1991, when I started actively attending theater in the area. There's a lot of talk about vibrancy and diversity in the theater scene, but pretty much the same companies receive nominations and awards, and I might add many of the same actors are also disproportionately represented. Many nominations and awards were deservedly earned, no question about it. Others, I'm not so sure about, but maybe. On some, however - the companies and performers - caught a break, based solely on their reputations. The actors being recognized were in the enviable position of being cast for the role. Others were not so lucky. As theater folks will tell you, this is a tough town to break into as a performer, still more so if you are a fledgling company.

You don't need a statistical background to interpret the results: a casual eyeballing of the data indicates something's amiss. I've pointed out elsewhere the Helen Hayes Awards process has methodological problems, some as obvious as a small sample size of judges (8) and others more subtle as conflicts of interest. (As an aside, don't you think it's odd that one self-serving organization is the sole arbiter of theater excellence for the area?)

To add fairness to the process, the HHA folks might go the way of the Joseph Jefferson Awards in Chicago, where they got the idea of "Recommended" play. The Jeff distinguishes between Large and Midsize companies in many categories in their equity productions; they have a separate process for non-equity shows. They do not judge touring companies, mime or unscripted shows, or children's theatre.

Some of the great shows I saw last year that did not rate a mention included: Bus Stop and Da at the Olney Theatre Center, The Goat, or Who is Syvlia? at Rep Stage, Mauritius and Lips Together, Teeth Apart at Bay Theatre Company, and the Studio Theatre's Reasons to Be Pretty. These are all curiously HHA Recommended for whatever that is worth.

As an aside, while I thought Candide a fine show, it was a co-production with the Goodman Theatre where it played for 7 weeks plus a rehearsal period prior to opening in DC. That represents a considerable advantage in performance before being presented to our critics and audiences.

If no changes are planned for the current process, perhaps the DC Theatre Scene will adjust their Audience Choice cycle to coincide with the annual Helen Hayes Awards? Alternatively, why don't we consider mounting another awards group to honor the theater excellence as they do in New York City? If nothing else, it will add balance to a process that is subjective, arbitrary, and, at the least, has the appearance of bias.