My first interview was with Mark Teh from the Five Arts Centre a.k.a a judge in the Theatre category.

"I really do think that the judging process has been open, with a variety of backgrounds represented on the panel such as practitioners, academics and critics. Also, we had a lot of discussion on technical stuff, for example the definitions of a (theatrical) ensemble and whether members of ensembles could be nominated for Best Actor, things like that."

Was there dynamism in adopting changes from one year to another?

"Kakiseni has been prompt in relaying criticisms and feedback, and also gave independence to the judges to make decisions throughout the process. They've also made efforts to include individuals from different linguistic backgrounds onto the panel, which is good."

From the horse's mouth itself

"I experienced firsthand the efforts to maintain integrity of the awards. It is really true that whenever you are involved in any manner with a production, you have to remove yourself from judging it. As a result, in 2003 I was able to judge only two out of a total of ten productions."

What about the accusations?

"Being uninformed has a lot to do with it. People tend to forget that awards are given to a production and not only an individual. That whole fuss about Mac Chan? Remember, the awards recognized him as part of a production, not just as an individual. Besides, he's good, so of course he wins!"

"At this point, I would say that it is too early to come to conclusions about the CAA. Ideally, assessments should be made further down the road, like in five to seven years' time. Having said that, we can't dismiss how helpful the awards have been in raising the profile of the arts. More grants are being received and recognition accorded, which is always helpful."

Moving on to a slightly different topic, I found out that he has decided to take a rain check on judging for next year's event, after being on board since the award's inception in 2002.

"You want to know why I am doing this? Honestly, it's because I have had to watch too many bad shows in my capacity as a judge. If I had to do it for another year, I might just drop out of theatre altogether. I need a break from watching such shows to keep myself passionate and engaged in the arts," he replied half-jokingly.

"It's true. You see, when the Actor's Studio Box in Dataran Merdeka was wiped out by the floods, we lost a valuable platform for young, edgier acts. The larger spaces that are left create a different dynamic. Being bigger spaces, there is less performer-audience intimacy, plus they cost more to rent."

The bigger picture?

"By having to invest so much more financially, performers then have to ask the question: How do we not drive ourselves into debt with this? Inevitably, this leads to performances catering to the space, instead of the other way round. The audience preference becomes your highest priority; more comedies and big names, as it translates here in KL.Hence, the quality of productions is compromised."

From theatre, I moved to dance and spoke to Joseph Gonzales, Head of the Dance Department in Akademi Seni Kebangsaan and judge in the dance category since day one.

"I think the talk of 'cronyism' was louder in the Theatre category. I am pretty sure the comments on the website did not come from the dance community. There's a wonderful sense of supporting one another's work within the dance community. Even if we might not be fans of one another's work, we won't go out and dismiss it as crap."

"I sense sincerity in the organisers' efforts to create fair and just awards, if there can ever be such a thing. Take the dance category for example. We judges come from a broad spectrum, from ballet school heads and avant-garde freelancers to classical, Chinese and Indian style dancers," he told me while going though the list in the CAA program booklet.

"I like very much the organizational aspect of the awards. At no point were there attempts to veto the judges' opinion by the organizers."

"When thinking about the process though, I do have one big concern, and it's the inability of the judges to attend all eligible shows," he said pensively, taking on a more somber expression.

"We realized this problem in the first year, and so set the minimum limit of five judges per show. But then, there will always be a difference say, if the five judges that went to watch a ballet show utterly despise the dance form, than if they were die-hard ballet aficionados," he said before quickly adding that he still believed that they (the judges) felt their role was to reward the person who did the best work.

Switching to Devil's Advocate mode, he admitted that one can never know the inner workings of the mind of another.

"At some point you have to just sit down and just say, 'I trust the judges.' In such a tiny industry as ours, there is no stopping bad blood between people. But from my observations, there is no evidence of such vindictiveness among the judges."

"Perhaps what the organizers can do is take a look at the voting record of each judge, and if there's a pattern of giving consistently high or low marks for a certain nominee, especially when all the other judges vote in the other direction, then Kakiseni could look into it. It might be something to think about."

Get over it darling

"This is how I respond to these accusation of cronyism; There is no point in me getting emotional about it all after all that I have put into it," said Dr. Mohd. Anis Mohd. Nor while making a gesture of flicking something pesky off his shoulder.

As a judge in the CAA Dance category, he wanted people to know what exactly came with the responsibility.

"Firstly, judging in the Cameronians brings no financial compensation. It takes a lot of adapting for us to be able to perform our duties well. As a family man, I found my schedule ruffled up because of this."

"When people hurl comments at us, do they bear in mind the ups and downs of the job? With declining other obligations, driving to a venue to parking and even keeping your mind clear and fit to effectively carry out your duty as a judge at each performance. And this is a year long commitment you know."

"The detractors throw around the word (cronyism) without considering how hurtful hey are being. Cronyism to me is something associated with politics, a very well orchestrated process with an aim to reach a preconceived end. In the context of the CAA, we do not have anything to gain from prescribing to a structure with pre-determined outcomes."

"Let me tell you this story. I was at the nominees' announcement event earlier this year to represent the panel of judges in the Dance category. What do I hear in the background but voices grumbling about the nominees' list, from the third or fourth row of seats. From where they sat, you can safely assume that these people are involved in the industry or are very slick gate crashers, but the point is that it was so vindictive. Such ruckus I would expect only from politics; why don't we just throw chairs at one another then?"

"These hurtful comments serve to negate the sense of fraternity and joint goal to see arts recognized in the country. It also overlooks the reality of performing arts in the Klang Valley, one that is very limited and minute. What you see is what you have."

Be honest

Overall, I gathered a sense of frustration and disappointment from the nominees and judges alike at what was being said without any substantiation. Also, it has to be said that despite the criticisms and weaknesses attributed at the running of the awards, they all agreed that a lot of good has also come out of it, especially in making the performing arts slowly move away the its long-standing position at the periphery of public attention, which can't be seen as such a bad thing.

And the big fuss about this awards night that ended over a month ago? Well, I see the controversy as reflective of the level of discussion held in this land of ours. Something done with good intentions will always be 'rained upon' by those who would do anything to have you believe that you don't deserve any recognition for your efforts. The worst thing is, this is sometimes done just for the sake of hurting others, and nothing more. Is it so difficult to support a fledgling industry that is a healthy presence in our society?

So criticize the process if you must, and even be bold to point out a shortcoming that might have been overlooked. But please, leave your name. A legitimate e-mail address would help too.

ADRIANA NORDIN MANAN is glad that Rentakini has no section for reader's comments, though she welcomes them at adriana@malaysiakini.com . She enjoys being the resident drama queen in the office and insists that she's nobody's crony.