B. Iden Payne awards are here again

Post by **bradisntclever** » September 26th, 2007, 5:05 pm

ratliff wrote:We can't make anyone come see improv.

In order to boost attendance at The Starter Kit's shows, I kidnap children, tape some free AIC tickets to a brick and then throw it through their parents' window. After the show, they tend to forgive me.

kbadr · Post by **kbadr** » September 26th, 2007, 5:19 pm

ratliff wrote:We can't make anyone come see improv.

No one said we can. So...because we can't *make* anyone see improv, we shouldn't actively try to increase the exposure of it? What kind of logic is that?

I did not know about improv in Austin until 3 years ago. If I had known about it earlier, I think I would have done it earlier.

This discussion irritates me. I really, truly, do not care about who wins what award. I was just concerned with increasing the public awareness about what we're doing. B Iden Payne is the only theatrical award listing that Austin has, that I know of (there's also The Chronicle, which we're already listed in). If not a category there...then where? Are we just arguing to be contrary? Feh.

And why wouldn't we *explore* the possibility of getting onto the damn ballot? It's not OUR award listing. We don't run it? Who cares if it's not appropriate. That's for them to decide.

I don't even know what the fuck we're arguing about.

ratliff · Post by **ratliff** » September 26th, 2007, 6:07 pm

I know what I'm arguing about. I will try to convey it better.

When I said "We can't make anyone come see improv," I wasn't referring to the general public; I was referring to the voters of ACoT. Just because it's on the ballot doesn't mean they'll rush out and see it. So you have an improv award being voted on by a tiny minority of people, i.e., those members of ACoT who've seen enough improv to have an opinion on it.

We are being given an opportunity to decide, within our community, who best represents it, and we are choosing to take offense at this because that's not how other awards are given. (I have tried, apparently unsuccessfully, to point out why this approach makes sense to me. I give up.)

If we feel that our community is better served by being on the ballot than by deciding among ourselves who deserves the award, that's fine. I'm just pointing out that it comes with certain trade-offs, and one of them is that we surrender the naming of the actual winner to forces unknown who may have little context for or knowledge of what they're voting on. If we really and truly don't care who gets the award, then obviously the point is moot, and we should by all means demand our constitutional right to be on the ACoT ballot.

kbadr · Post by **kbadr** » September 26th, 2007, 6:12 pm

ratliff wrote:If we really and truly don't care who gets the award, then obviously the point is moot...

Hence my confusion.

Meh. Wha-tevah.

We still have to figure out who the winner is this year. We don't, as a community, agree that it doesn't matter, so we're going to have a hell of a time deciding. And then it'll rub ACoT the wrong way. And then we probably won't be asked to even do that next year.

York99 · Post by **York99** » September 26th, 2007, 7:26 pm

ratliff wrote:Okay. So if I'm reading this thread right, the point is not actually to honor the most accomplished improv group but rather to get the category on the ballot to raise awareness of improv?

That might be the case at first, sure, but that's inherent in voting anyway. Most years, the best picture oscar doesn't go to the best picture. Usually the nominees are the best of the bunch, but the actual award goes to the most popular of those.

there's a whole lot of marketing to the oscar voters from the production companies, which shows that they're not voted on totally on merit.

HerrHerr · Post by **HerrHerr** » September 28th, 2007, 2:55 pm

I'd trade fifteen years of Austin theater awards for one year of consistently large audiences.

Just saying.

shando · Post by **shando** » October 15th, 2007, 5:04 pm

So what ever happened to this?

apiaryist · Post by **apiaryist** » October 16th, 2007, 11:07 am

I'm still not sure why we want to be included in the Payne awards. What is the main reason? Publicity? The 'respect' of people who are not our peers? Legitimacy? I'm genuinely curious. I'm also withholding my opinions on this until I better understand what we are trying to do.

York99 · Post by **York99** » October 17th, 2007, 9:32 am

apiaryist wrote:I'm still not sure why we want to be included in the Payne awards. What is the main reason? Publicity? The 'respect' of people who are not our peers? Legitimacy? I'm genuinely curious. I'm also withholding my opinions on this until I better understand what we are trying to do.

Respect, legitimacy, deserved recognition, marketing...
all valid reasons, in my opinion

shando · Post by **shando** » October 17th, 2007, 9:41 am

York99 wrote:
apiaryist wrote:I'm still not sure why we want to be included in the Payne awards. What is the main reason? Publicity? The 'respect' of people who are not our peers? Legitimacy? I'm genuinely curious. I'm also withholding my opinions on this until I better understand what we are trying to do.
Respect, legitimacy, deserved recognition, marketing...
all valid reasons, in my opinion

I would also point out the biggest part of this--they asked to give an improv troupe an award as a gesture signaling we are part of the larger Austin theatrical and performance community. Personally I don't care about the mechanism of deciding, although in the long run I think it would be great if the wider community of ACOT voters were, in fact, knowledgeable enough about improv to decide the winner. I understand in the short term we're not there yet.

But seeing that they are doing this out of goodwill toward us and since ACoT umbrellas the whole AIC fiscally, to turn down the gesture makes us look like dicks. Or if we don't get our shit together to choose among ourselves we look like improv flakes, which is looking to be the case as the ceremony is this Sunday.

Justin D. · Post by **Justin D.** » October 17th, 2007, 9:43 am

HerrHerr wrote:I'd trade fifteen years of Austin theater awards for one year of consistently large audiences.

Just saying.

That's part of the point of getting listed in the awards category, isn't it? Drawing positive attention to the AIC can help increase the likelihood of consistent large audiences.

mcnichol · Post by **mcnichol** » October 17th, 2007, 9:49 am

shando wrote:Personally I don't care about the mechanism of deciding, although in the long run I think it would be great if the wider community of ACOT voters were, in fact, knowledgeable enough about improv to decide the winner. I understand in the short term we're not there yet.

This raises an interesting point though -- do people think that this will actually change over time? That more people from the 'theater community' will be actively going to improv shows?

Conversely, have improvisors found themselves going to more theater than before due to our involvement in ACOT?

Also, regarding 'legitimacy' -- we are already legitimate. As much as I do think we should be a part of ACOT, I don't think that doing so gives us a legitimacy we have been lacking.

shando · Post by **shando** » October 17th, 2007, 10:00 am

mcnichol wrote:
shando wrote:Personally I don't care about the mechanism of deciding, although in the long run I think it would be great if the wider community of ACOT voters were, in fact, knowledgeable enough about improv to decide the winner. I understand in the short term we're not there yet.
This raises an interesting point though -- do people think that this will actually change over time? That more people from the 'theater community' will be actively going to improv shows?

I've already seen it change over the last year or so. We're at a point in the history of Austin improv that a lot more people from the theater community (both performers and audience) are coming to our shows. I know that the immediate SVT audience is a lot more informed about improv than they were a couple years ago. You see it in the number of people who are theater actors either getting into or back into improv--the Is That Science People for instance, whose fan base is largely "theater people." It doesn't have to do with the award. It has to do with the vitality of the community seeping out into the rest of the public in the ways it hasn't before, and the offer of the award is a symbol of that.

Short answer--yes.

sara farr · Post by **sara farr** » October 17th, 2007, 10:12 am

Okay. So what happened with this award??

York99 · Post by **York99** » October 17th, 2007, 10:40 am

shando wrote:But seeing that they are doing this out of goodwill toward us

Goodwill? I don't understand how this is goodwill compared to everyone else.

They accept our membership money just like everyone else. We fit their two tests: performance and Austin.

In a way I feel like we are legitimizing them as much or more as they are legitimizing us.