Not that it seemed like a great idea in the first place, but it’s somewhat disappointing to note that ABC’s Reality Awards will not be going produced after all.

A reality awards show seems silly, just as an idea; and there’s no doubt that the thing fell apart due to the many, many business and legal considerations surround it – but is there any aesthetic reason not to have them?

Consider: The Emmy® awards already have categories for any other genre on television one could care to mention. And while the Golden Globes® also have a television category, the Emmys® are considered the preeminent recognition of televised excellence. So why isn’t there a “Reality” category? Perhaps, the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences thinks that reality TV is a passing fad (it’s been around for nearly five years now, though).

But even if the A.T.A.S. had a category for reality shows, why shouldn’t they have a separate set of awards? It could be argued that reality TV is neither an art, nor a science. You could have a reality show that represents any category that would ordinarily be applied to scripted television. Drama, (Survivor), comedy, (I’m a Celebrity…), horror (MTV’s Fear), romance, (The Bachelor), etc … it’s all there. (Of course, these things could also be classified as documentaries, game shows, and whatnot.)

Then again, the tone of the proposed “Reality Awards” didn’t seem like it was going to be played entirely straight. “Hottest Hot Tub Scene,” does not sound like something from the same long artistic tradition of “Best Supporting Actress in a Mini-series”. And award shows just get sillier over time – this is an observable fact. This year, it’s hottest hot tub, next year it might be “Best Pixilated Weiner”. If the producers of reality TV want to be taken seriously as artists, an awards show would not make for a very good first step.

But, then again, reality shows aren’t really trying to be taken seriously (unless that’s what it takes to get you to watch them). They’re almost refreshingly blunt about the fact that they’re just entertainment, nothing more, sometimes less. What’s artistic about stranding people on a remote island? Or setting up a very complicated version of the Dating Game, for that matter?

It might come as a bit of a surprise to those of us living in the hinterlands (that is, outside of the city limits of Los Angeles and New York City) that the people who make television take it pretty seriously. They consider what they do “Art” – yes, even Hogan’s Heroes. After all, most television shows used to be scripted, and writing is an art form. So is acting, actually. But reality shows have neither of these things. What about the direction, editing, and cinematography? Those aren’t arts, those are crafts. They take skill and training, but they are fundamentally technical pursuits.

This doesn’t mean that reality television doesn’t deserve to have its own awards. Their technical staffs aren’t prohibited from winning Emmy® awards; but the Academy® isn’t likely to give out awards for “Biggest Asshole” or “Best Double-Cross”. God knows the performers would go in for it: by definition they are already cynical publicity hounds who’ll do anything to get on television. They make up an under- served community of media personalities.

It is disappointing that there won’t be a reality TV awards show. Even if they’ve never met, reality shows are a community on our television screens. They’re comprised of people who have decided that they want their lives to play out on a public stage – they’ve got a hell of a lot in common. It’s not for art’s sake that we deserve to see them all on the same stage; it’d just be fun. After all, if it doesn’t bother them that they are in no way, shape, or form, artists, why should it bother us?

-B. C. Silvia