Professional behavior

Friday on the TOC Blog, Christopher posted about some changes being planned by the Jeff committee—most notably, to us, the retirement of the "Citations." The year's two award ceremonies will now be known as the Equity Jeff Awards and the Non-Equity Jeff Awards.

We thought this was a great move, but the first comment we got on the post was a hysterical accusation that the Jeff committee was "disrespecting" the "professional" theater companies by giving non-Equity awards with the same name. "There is nothing you can write that will convince me The Goodman Theatre efforts should be considered in the same playing field as (ex) Lifeline," the commenter wrote, and furthermore, "They should have done the exact opposite-more to separate the professional and non-professional theatres in this city."

While we've discussed this here before, it seems to bear revisiting. There's clearly a contingent out there that fervently believes all non-Equity theater companies might as well be community theater, as these same folks often fan the flames of this argument in the comments at The Theater Loop as well. I can't for the life of me figure out who these people are. I have a hard time believing they're theater artists. In some other city, maybe (and when non-Equity tours of Broadway musicals come through town charging Equity-tour prices [*cough*Rent*cough*], I hope Equity pickets those shows). But as far as our homegrown theater, Chicago is different. Equity even acknowledges that by the existence of Chicago Area Theatre contracts.

As I mentioned in the comments at TOC, the "brand audit" on which basis the Jeffs are making these changes was based on interviews with managing and artistic directors at theaters both Equity and non. In other words, this is based on what the theaters indicated they thought should happen.

And as I also said there, I have to believe that the people getting so hung up on "professional" and "non-professional" have a limited understanding of the way theater actually works in Chicago. The Equity and non-Equity designations are only an indication of the theater's status with the actors' union. Let's not forget that there are directors and designers in the mix as well. Take Dolly West's Kitchen at TimeLine, since I was at that premiere last night. The cast is all non-Equity, and the show will go in the Non-Equity wing of the Jeffs, but the production staff includes director Kimberly Senior, scenic designer Brian Bembridge, costume designer Christine Conley, lighting designer Charles Cooper, and sound designer Tamara Roberts, all of whom work regularly on both sides of the Equity divide. (Consider also that PJ Powers told Nina Metz in the Trib two years ago that TimeLine's budget had reached half a million dollars. Does that sound like community theater?)

Then there's the range of CAT contracts. Many companies that are in the Equity wing of the Jeffs (and that our commenter would presumably consider "professional") run under contracts like the CAT-N, and can have casts with the likes of one Equity actor to 15 non-Equity (to name one show I saw not too long ago). That's why non-Equity performers often get nominated for Equity Jeff Awards already, as with Sara Sevigny's win at last fall's ceremony for Porchlight's Assassins.

And of course don't forget that big theaters like the Goodman and Steppenwolf provide day jobs for untold numbers of young artists who are running their own non-Equity companies by night. It's not simply a dichotomy of "professional" and "non-professional" in Chicago; happily, there's so much more interplay among all the levels than folks like our commenter seem to realize.

So you see why I find it hard to imagine our artists having this vitriolic attitude towards non-Equity companies. Which leads back to the question: Who are these misguided people zealously defending the Goodman's honor? Where are they getting their ideas, and who's encouraging them to think this way?

Also of note this week: My story from Wednesday's issue on PJ Paparelli's bold plans for American Theater Company was enhanced by Friday's announcement of ATC's next season. "Bold plans" starts to look like an understatement.

Comments

[Megan]

Hi Kris,

I just read the TOC post and my gut instinct was that the angry and misled commenters are disgruntled Jeff Committee Members. My general impression of some (but not all) of the Jeff folks way back during my days as an ensemble member of a Citation-eligible (e.g. "non-professional") theatre company was that they were fairly friendly, suburban-ish, over-40 folks who thought it was cute we were giving theatre a try in our gritty urban space, and that, given the chance, they'd probably rather have been enjoying gin-and-tonics at intermission in the Goodman lobby. Perhaps the decision on the name and branding change was made without as much involvement of the total membership as some of them would have wished...

[Mark Jeffries]

Let's just say that Julie Johansen (she posts her full name on Jones' blog) thinks that the Drury Lane Water Tower production of "Morning's at Seven" with Jessica Tate (OK, Mona from "Who's the Boss?" for some of you) is one of the best shows she's ever seen.

And in her post on the David Schwimmer "Our Town" kerfuffle on Jones, she claimed she went to NU with Schwimmer. She sure doesn't write like she went to school with Schwimmer.

[Nick Keenan]

Megan, I think you may be on to something here. It's definitely an up-for-grabs moment in the history of the organization. There's clearly some internal debate and also internal desire for innovation at the Jeffs right now. But then again, brand auditors don't do their job without talking to everyone in the organization first, and then outsiders (the 20 artistic and managing directors they consulted) second. I'd be very surprised if all Jeff committee members didn't see these recommendations coming - it was certainly released to Chicago Theaters with the approval if not editing power of the Jeff leadership since they're the ones paying for it - and I just don't see disgruntled Jeff members as the blog lobbying types during a period of flux. Especially when they could just go to the marketing committee directly and get the results they wanted.

Oof. It's very hard for me to see the raw disdain on the TOC blog comments right now. The fact that they even care just boggles my mind. One troll is dismissible, sure, but something really unsettles me about three passionate if inarticulate nay-sayers reading that particular blog post. It's like waking up from your normal life one day and realizing you suddenly have a team of arch-villains bent on your destruction but no one bothered to set you up with superhero powers.

Your question cuts me to the quick, Kris. They're subscribers for all I know - I don't think they're Jeff, I don't think they're industry (unless they're non-working union cronies, but I doubt that too), and I certainly don't think they're casual audience members. I just know that they'd probably look at me funny.

I guess it underscores the fact to me that storefront theater has a massive image problem - right here in Chicago - that's gone untreated for too long. I think we're proud of our Non-Eq work, but we can be apologetic of that pride to the general public - the people we work with at our day jobs.

The Jeffs aren't apologetic. They give us awards, and mail out the press release when they do. They show up and clap. God bless 'em.

[Megan]

Nick, I think you're on to something, too. It's been awhile since I've even thought about the Jeff Committee; and yes, I doubt they are the flaming-comment types. My personal dealings with a Jeff Citation chairperson were always pleasant and he was utterly supportive of the company in which I was involved. I had thought perhaps committee members weren't fully included in the discussions that preceded this change. And I share your distress about the TOC commenters' ire--whoever they may truly be.