I am curious.....

How did people like the change of venue ??Also how accurate were everyone's predictions ?I was pretty well in agreeance with the adjudicators except that I thought SNOOPY would be second or third placed musical rather than SOUND OF MUSIC. ( I predicted Snoopy 2nd Me & My Girl 3rd ).I also thought that GARDEN PARTY, DEQ AND KADS' LIPSTICK DREAMS would be in the top 20.In fact I had Lipstick Dreams picked in the top 10. ( So I was way out there ).Am I totally out on a limb here or do I have a special fondness for KADS and Blak Yak ? ( I'm a member of both clubs.....but had nothing to do with any of these shows ). Even critics find it difficult distancing themselves from their home club , I freely admit this.These comments are in no way a criticism of the adjudicators, who do a great job. I'm just interested in sparking a discussion. I was going to try and organise a preFinleys live chat, but couldn't find the time.Kim

GrantI agree and disagree.It is true that all the adjudicators can offer is their subjective opinion of the plays that they have seen throughout the year. That is why the certificates awarded by the ITA state that the certificate is awarded for the 3rd, 2nd, best play/musical as judged by the adjudicators appointed by the ITAHowever I do support the scoring system adopted by the ITA as it ensures that all adjudicators assess productions on a consistent basis and that individual bias for high or low scoring are ironed out. Adjudicators are required to see, and assess, a number of productions so that their marking bias can be calculated and corrected.Because adjudicating is such a subjective matter the ITA are very careful in choosing adjudicators who are, in their opinion, knowledgeable enough to be able to provide a fair and balanced assessment of a wide variety of productions. The ITA also try for a range of people as adjudicators so, as far as possible, we are not all male and over 50. (See next months Link for the 1999 adjudicators)One of the common errors for new adjudicators is to assess the play and not the production. I think this could well be the reason for the wide range of scores at the recent adjudicators course. An experienced adjudicator should be able to mark highly a well produced play (or musical) that he/she does not particularly like.I agree with you that there will always be disagreement because we are all different (thank God!) and we all like different aspects of a production. But I support the recognition of the best play/musical and I personally will always be amenable to improvements in the error prone system that we are currently using.George> hehehe> this could end up being Pandora's box :)> My views on the awards (as opposed to the night itself - which> is great idea!) are known to a few people. Feel free to stop reading> here if you're fed up with hearing me whinge about the awards :)> *steps onto soapbox*> I was delighted to see that so many adjudicators' certificates> awarded. These recognise what the adjudicators consider to be outstanding> achievements throughout the year. The awards are discussed and debated> amongst the adjudicators before being decided on.> I like this system. It recognises that the opinions of the adjudicators> are subjective and encourages them to justify and debate their choices> with each other. It appears to me from the range of areas that they> have chosen to present certificates in that a great deal of careful> consideration was given. Well done!> However, personally I think the notion of presenting an overall> award for the "best" in theatre and musicals is a nonsense.> The system used to arrive at the result is even worse than the notion> itself.> The recent Finley adjudicator's training session adequately demonstrated> what i consider to be the hopelessness of trying arrive at a reasonable> consensus on the quality of a performance. The Guild Of Drama Adjudicators> marking system is great for arriving at and justifying an individual> score - but does nothing to narrow the gap between individuals.> As part of their training, the team of potential adjudicators> attended the same performance and then gave it marks ranging from> 33 to 75 out of 100. Surely, no amount of statistical wizardry can> massage any sense out of figures like this - not on a tiny sample> of three or so adjudicators attending each performance for the Finley's.> The best you can hope for is some notion that some shows belong at> the good end of the spectrum and others at the not-so-good. I can't> help feeling that any suggestion that you can conceivably rank shows> differentiating between 1st, 2nd, 3rd... according to these types> of results is a pretense.> It doesn't matter how experienced, skilled, knowledgable, fair> or otherwise you adjudicators are - if you only ask three people to> rank the best movies of the year, you can't claim the results are> representative or authoritative.> I've been roundly and justifiably criticised by a few friends> for trashing the awards system and not offering a constructive solution.> I'm afraid i'm no closer today than i was five years ago to being> able to offer any suggestions.> But i commend the ITA for highlighting the participation of the> clubs in the evening's entertainment and for encouraging the presentation> of so many adjudicator's certificates.> *steps off soapbox*> Who's next?> :)> Cheers> Grant

Re: I am curious.....

Thread (11 posts)