The news is swarming with articles on the recent and second time of the omission of darker complexion actors from the Academy Awards. There have been all sorts of buzz and hysteria around the matter. Yet, if we peer into one of the nominees of the Academy Awards, a piece of evidence emerges which demonstrates the inadequacies of the Academy Awards and the critiques on the Academy Awards.
The critiques of the Academy Awards are, time after time, summed into prejudice, racism, and ignorance. Yet, those are not proper arguments, for it is fallacious on the grounds it is targeting a thing instead of the criterion of what deserves an award. A weighted argument would be to observe the essential definition of how an award is given. This is provided by the Academy Awards:
Academy Awards of Merit shall be given annually to honor outstanding artistic and scientific achievements in theatrically released feature-length motion pictures, and to honor other achievements as provided for in these rules and approved by the Board of Governors.
The question that follows is, "What qualifies an outstanding artistic and scientific achievements?" This question is asking, "Where do you set the bar of outstanding artistic and scientific achievements?" Outstanding can be translated into exceptionally good. Thus, another question arises, which is, "What is good?" This question is the bane of many ethicists. Thankful, they are saved for it is in context to artistry, "what is good artistic and scientific achievement?" The only assumption one is left with is good equates to a certain level of skill that is attained through training and education to demonstrate a certain capability in the craft. It is similar to stating, "One is good at his or her craft." Therefore, by stating exceptionally good, it implies an uttermost attainment of the craft. In conclusion, the thing that qualifies outstanding artistic and scientific achievements is demonstrating the uttermost attainment of the respected craft.
The proof that the Academy Awards lacks proper decision-making capabilities is by nominating Will Smith for Concussion because his accent does not reflect a Nigerian accent. This is well explored by the article, "Teaching American actors how to do African accents," written by Andrea Crossan on Public Radio International. I would healthily assume that an actor who cannot correctly depict the person he or she tries to embody, is not outstanding in his or her craft. Thus, which other choices did the Academy Awards poorly pick? I would be unaware due to my deficiency of research into the other movies; nonetheless the decisions made should be reviewed.
One may assume that this may be setting the bar a little too high, yet the word choice of the Academy Awards states it does not set the bar high. It sets it where it is supposed to be. Moreover, it is more than evident that both sides lack any merit to their argument or understanding of their own matter. If the arts are more concerned with materialistic and characteristic components rather than the craft itself, it would be hardly art at all.