What's an Oscar?

Must art be reduced to a competitive field? The Olympics produces clear winners, but exactly what inched Tilda over the finish line ahead of Ruby Dee? Why should five great editors be ranked?

Peer recognition is an honour, but those gold statuettes are more about quantity than quality - quantities of box office cash and pay cheques finessed by agents.

For all its glitzy frocks, Oscar's got dirty fingernails.

In the wake of the Writers' Guild dispute and with a Screen Actors Guild strike looming, it's ironic that the Academy Awards were established as a by-product of powerful Hollywood bigwigs subverting a threat to their authority by actors and technicians.

Fresh in their minds was Equity's effective strike in 1919 which darkened Broadway until the union was recognised as theatre's official negotiating body.

Determined to keep unionisation out of Movieland, its elite devised a cunning strategy, eschewing anything overtly political.

They established The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science (AMPAS), primarily to codify their control over an industry which had been exploiting both crew and performers for years, forcing them to work without contracts.

This exalted cabal, including Cecil B DeMille, Douglas Fairbanks and Mary Pickford and the Warner Brothers, were well known for their right-wing views, highlighting their hypocrisy.

Their rumours branded "communist" anyone who tried to protest against such documented conditions as extras left to stand in freezing water for 10 hours or refusing to compensate anyone injured on set.

Forging links with politicos fixated on stock market madness and preparation for another war, AMPAS welcomed bulldogs J Edgar Hoover and Will Hays to police "the lawless years" and establish a new moral code for movies.

Recognising a direct threat, a coterie including Boris Karloff and The Marx Brothers met to found The Screen Actors Guild, assuring protection not just for stars but all performers.

In 1929, to deflect public attention away from back-room politicking, AMPAS introduced The Academy Awards, retrospectively celebrating films and stars from the previous two years.

Since their cover story was the advancement of standards rather than recouping expenses, the ceremony was modest and the winners were announced weeks before.

It wasn't until 1941 that AMPAS realised that competitive Oscar rivalry would swell box office coffers and the Oscar industry was born. Predictably, it's been slow to embrace change and recognise talent from less conservative quarters.

Perhaps, in its 80th year, though still in thrall to the celebrity culture that it helped nurture, Oscar will renew itself, downplay divisive competition, listen more closely to the independent voices of disparate political views and ethnic origins.

Can it heed the warning of "best picture" No Country For Old Men? In times of confusion, we need a re-evaluation.