So while I would like to forget about the whole Wasserstein Prize thing, I just can't. Partly because the Director of Communications for the Theater Development Fund, David LeShay, emailed me the day after my blog post about the fund's decision not to award a prize this year because none of the 19 finalists selected by THEIR process was good enough for it. (And yes, they blamed the playwrights, not their own process, until they ran into a firestorm of protest and suddenly changed their minds.) And boy, it was a really dumb exchange.

First, our email exchange of yesterday, exactly as it went:

From: David LeShay, Director of Communications, Theater Development Fund
Subject: wasserstein
Date: November 17, 2010 11:11:37 AM EST

i wish you'd post this interview...
there's been alot of acting out and misinformation going on..but i guess one can't control that..just try to give the rfacts (which no one really tried to get)...but if you're going to blog about us..i'd appreciate you ask directly. feel free to post this:
http://newyork.timeout.com/arts-culture/upstaged-blog/589489/is-the...

From: Kamy Wicoff, Founder, She Writes.com
Subject: wasserstein
Date: November 17, 2010 11:33:09 AM EST

Dear David,

Thanks for sending, though characterizing people's reaction to the Prize's decision as "acting out" feels a bit condescending at best.

I'd rather not post this interview if I could have the conversation myself, as these are not necessarily the questions I would have asked -- would Victoria make herself available for either an email Q&A or discussion on our She Writes Radio show?

And in the interest of getting the facts straight, who is the funder of the grant? I feel like the facts are a bit murky in terms of exactly how this is structured, who is behind it, what is at stake for re-funding it, etc. I also understand the prize has chosen not to identify the judges for the prize. Is that correct?

Thanks,
Kamy Wicoff

From: David LeShay
Subject: wasserstein
Date: November 17, 2010 12:08:31 PM EST

Acting out being expressing outrage prior to investigating the facts. You'd be shocked at the messages I've seen in the past few days. That's not condescending just an observation.

Best,
D

From: Kamy Wicoff
Subject: wasserstein
Date: November 17, 2010 12:19:56 PM EST

Dear David,

Understood.

In the interest of getting the facts out, how about an interview with Victoria for She Writes?

Thanks,
Kamy

From: David LeShay
Subject: wasserstein
Date: November 17, 2010 12:46:30 PM EST

Not right now
Thanks

From: Kamy Wicoff
Subject: wasserstein
Date: November 17, 2010 12:52:30 PM EST

So what would you suggest to someone trying to get the facts straight? Read the Time Out article?

From: David LeShay
Subject: wasserstein
Date: November 17, 2010 12:56:41 PM EST

Or nytimes artsblog. Thanks

From: Kamy Wicoff
Subject: wasserstein
Date: November 17, 2010 1:00:44 PM EST

I did link to that and used it as a source.

Thanks,
Kamy

Fin.

A few observations, if I may.

1) This entire thread was conducted under the subject line "wasserstein". But the Theater Development Fund has such high standards of quality they couldn't sully themselves by awarding their $25K to a struggling young woman playwright who was just "ok."

2) "Acting out?" Really? Are the thousands of men and women who have protested this nothing more than a bunch of foot-stamping children, "acting out" because they are upset about something else but are so immature they randomly decided to throw a fit over this (when it could just as easily have been over their spilled milk) just because they like to throw fits? Because that is what "acting out" implies. Not conscious protest, but childish ranting. And I for one could not be more conscious in my protest of their decision.

3) The Time Out New York article, was conducted by one Adam Feldman, who commiserated with Victoria Bailey (whom he describes in his intro as "gracious and determinedly fair-minded") about how hard it is to be on her side of things, cause he can relate as a member of the Drama Critics' Circle. "That is something that comes up often with the Drama Critics' Circle," he says in his hard-hitting interview, filled with facts. "We’re bound by our bylaws in ways that can yield unexpected results, and sometimes we can't give a prize." I don't know what that means and frankly I don't care. If you can't figure out a way to give a prize to ONE WOMAN PLAYWRIGHT in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, YOU are the problem, not the applicants or the by-laws or whatever.

4) David LeShay doesn't capitalize "I."

5) In the Time Out article, much is made of the "ominous" statement by one of the prize's funders, Heidi Ettinger, that if it was not possible "to insure the integrity of the prize and provide selection panels the freedom they need free of outside pressures," they may just STOP AWARDING IT ALL TOGETHER. And whose fault will that be? The Time Out piece makes it quite clear:

"In pitting the values of 'high standards' and 'integrity' versus the threat of 'outside pressures,' Ettinger seemed to be signaling serious doubts about the viability of the Wasserstein Prize after this year's blowup. In insisting that it give an award this year, might activists have inadvertently put the program in peril? Has the power of the grassroots put the flower at risk?"

So let me get this straight. The super-high-standards, super-high-integrity team at the Wasserstein Prize not only embarrassed and failed 19 young women playwrights, who went from being finalists for one of the most prestigious awards in the country for women working in their field to being the 19 women who sucked so hard that none of them was worthy of it, IT IS NOW BLAMING THE PEOPLE WHO SPOKE UP ABOUT IT for making things so tough for those poor, fragile judges that they may just have to give the whole thing up altogether. Which, let me tell you, would be REALLY great for the young women playwrights all over the land.

One thought, Theater Development Fund? Rename it the wasserstein-with-a-lowercase-w Prize. That might make it more clear just how much respect you have for Wendy's life and legacy, and for the obstacles she overcame to become one of this country's few successful female playwrights. (For more on just how hard it is for women to succeed in theater, read this excellent article about the study conducted by Cecilia Rouse and Emily Sands about gender bias in theater, which suggests that in addition to sexism there is a pipeline problem -- something the Wasserstein Prize is poised to correct.) Because in the end -- if you read the Time Out article, or the NYT Arts Beat Blog, you will see that in all their communications about this the spokespeople for the prize have completely and totally forgotten/ignored/undermined what Bailey states as the mission of the prize: "this is a grant whose purpose the funder feels really deeply about," she stated in her Time Out interview, "It’s about acknowledging young women."

Just not if they don't feel like it one year.

My god. I feel like acting out.

Anybody else feel a She Writes Prize coming on?