Moxie's attempt to stick it to TONY

This week's issue of Time Out, combined with the recent free-tickets-for-bloggers controversy, has got me (and many, many others) really pissed off. It's their annual theater issue, and several of the articles seem dedicated to somehow upping the hipness quotient by airing dirty laundry and gossip rather than covering the more respectable elements of the industry. I was initally angered by the "beware the blogotainmercial" (what does that even mean, anyway?) section, but I quickly realized that us bloggers aren't the only ones being insulted by Time Out this week - calling chorus girls "sub-Vegas troupers whose hotness quotient ranges from 'meh' to 'gaaah!'" is just one of the many gems in the issue. I've written a letter to the editor, which I'm pretty sure won't be published because it's a tad on the long side. In fairness, some articles in the issue are just fine - it's cool that they include a list of notable blogs (if only online), and the "This is Why They're Hot" article gives credit to some great people who deserve recognition. I've posted my full letter below, and I hope that others will write letters of their own to rebutt the misinformation in the issue. Here's the letter:

Time Out’s annual theater issue has left me bewildered, disappointed, and angered. The issue seems to take aim at the theater community as much as celebrate it. In articles dedicated to New York’s theater community, you manage to put down chorus girls, Stephen Sondheim, and a lot of undeserving members of the community in between. Next year, why not title it “Theater’s Ugly Underbelly – Exposed!”

Your assertion that theater bloggers are not to be trusted (with the exception of three excellent blogs) defies logic, and has hit the blog community below the belt. Yes, we bloggers are offered occasional free tickets to shows, sometimes in exchange for a review. These bloggers are largely contributing members of the theater community, accustomed to receiving free tickets through friends, colleagues, actors in shows, etc. The idea that a free ticket would be enough to make us write a glowing review of a play we disliked is preposterous. We’re just not that easily led. How does our situation differ from your own staff of theater reviewers, who certainly don’t buy their own tickets? And most importantly, why would you go after the little guy? Bloggers are attempting to slowly reshape the geography of an industry where only ONE review matters. If you want to take issue with biased reviewers, why not go after the Times? Oh, because it’s been done, and wouldn’t be hip, which is clearly the intent of this issue - an intent that seems to supersede good judgment.

You recommend that theatergoers do their stargazing at celebrity gossip sites rather than the theater. So why the tacky list of blind items? The theater isn’t Hollywood, and airing this dirty laundry is embarrassing and lacks class.

Beyond issues of taste, plenty of your purported “dirty secrets” are factually misleading oversimplifications. Here are just a few examples: Stephen Sondheim does a lot more work than just “plunk out a tune and basic song structure at a piano”. Saying that orchestras are “faking it” gives no credit to the hundreds of musicians who went on strike in 2003 to prevent the use of canned music on Broadway. The idea that “Tonys mean nothing” is absurd – just take a look at the advertisements for current Broadway shows, and you’ll see “Tony Winner so and so” used whenever possible as a marketing tool. Tonys mean a great deal to actors and the people who employ them, not to mention the folks buying the tickets. And for the record, I’ve seen dozens of Broadway ensemble performers who are beautiful, sexy, and phenomenally talented, both close up and from afar.

I am disappointed to say the least by the amount of bitchy gossip and lack of substance in this issue devoted to New York’s quintessential cultural offering. The theater is brimming with interesting shows, writers, performers, companies, and trends. You might have used some of those ill-conceived pages for interviews with a few “Playbill Bunnies”, who instead got only a picture and a quick caption. “This Is Why They’re Hot” is a step in the right direction, but it’s not enough. Shame on you, Time Out.


Moxie the Maven
Theater Blogger and NYC Casting Assistant
www.moxiethemaven.com