Quote:
Originally Posted by micpoc
Wow. I'm sort of stunned by the positive comments here, grudging though some of them are. I've watched exactly four complete episodes of the show, plus bits of others here and there, and I really can't see what the appeal is; in fact, I find it positively nauseating. How is this "trainwreck" of a show anything other than Star Search with the public humiliation factor upped about a thousand percent??
Here's an insight into the mindset of the show: during the first season, I happened to catch the judges as guests on the Today show (for non-Americans, that's a morning news "magazine" show). During the conversation, the fact that Simon had called out a woman - don't recall whether she was an actual finalist or just someone who had tried out - for her weight was mentioned. The interviewer had the insight to question how Simon would rate Aretha Franklin. To his credit, Jackson said that Aretha IS an American Idol... but Simon, the grand poobah mastermind of the whole shebang, said simply "she would not win our competition."
Think about that. Then think about all the great singers who would NEVER get to the first round. Yes, I realize this isn't American Blues Belter, American Torch Singer, or American Whatever, so let's limit it to mainstream popular music. Most of the best-loved greats are highly idiosyncratic, unique singers who fit no known mold and who still grabbed us, because of OR in spite of their quirks; do you think AI is looking for that? Of course not; the entire conceit of the show is geared to selecting the most inoffensive, marketable, non-demanding, PR-malleable young singers they can. It's like a law firm hiring young associates fresh out of school, and none who rock the boat (no pun intended) need apply; it's not looking for artists, it's looking for interns. Where are the Ahmet Erteguns and the John Hammonds when we need them?
No offense intended to the show's fans, but how anyone can have any use for AI is beyond me. Not to be too idealistic about it, but everything that is wonderful and inspirational about music never makes it to Hollywood, from what I can see. The point about it being good family entertainment is a persuasive one but, I feel, an ultimately hollow one; the reliance on derisive commentary, and the encouragement of such in the viewership, aren't the sort of values I'd like to teach my kids, if I had any. If it is among the best things for families on TV (and I wouldn't question parents on this), then they have my sympathy. As Flat357 wrote, " I'm of the opinion that most people watch it for the mockery of people with little talent rather than the adoration of the minority who can actually entertain." How can this possibly be a good thing?
None of this should be taken as a knock against the singers themselves; it's just unfortunate that it takes a program such as this to get the American public excited about music, and then turns it into a spectator sport. It's not like the music biz lacked competition before AI, but to make the competition itself, rather than the art, the focus depresses me to no end.
Or am I being too harsh?  |
Not being too harsh, but you are completely missing/blind to what the appeal of the show is. First, I'll dispense with the mockery portion of it. The tried and true fans of the show don't watch it for the failure nor are their favorite shows the William Hung type shows... those are for very casual fans who do get a charge out of laughing at the self deception some folks have about their talent. someone will counter with the fact that the William Hung episodes (and ones like that one) garner the highest ratings... it is true perhaps but does not prove the point rather it shows that the folks who just want to see agonizing, embarassing failure are not the regular fan.
Folks who just dig this part of the show I think are probably pretty limited and probably like practical jokes that are more mean than funny and probably delight in scaring people. It takes all kinds...
Now... the part I think you don't get. Rags to riches stories are very interesting to a wide variety of ages and economic backgrounds. Getting a chance to completely be Cinderella is one that many quietly dream of....and while it may not be happening to us directly there is enough variety among the contestants that most people can identify with one or more contestants.
The point of this show is NOT to create pop stars... it is great when they go on to success but it is what happens DURING the competition that matters. Think of the show as a story and each week the episodes unfold more stories and no one knows exactly what will happen.
Now, about the example of Simon 'being mean' and ragging on a girl for her weight....
All good stories have to have villains, challenges have to threaten the protagonists, and people need to have a sense of how difficult show business is and that by chasing your dream you have to face the reality of the mean world. Does anyone think that folks that are obese get the same opportunities as those who are model thin? (rhetorical question)
AI sells hope to all of us. We get to watch ambitious young people who want to show what they can do and possibly change their lives by doing what they love and as we've all learned winning the show doesn't equal success but it doesn't doom to failure either! What matters is the week in, week out performance.
When I see the complaints about the contracts, the material, singing a song originally recorded in the 30's (but re recorded MANY TIMES in the 60's) it reminds me of girls who complain about how ugly bridesmaids dresses are... well, you don't go to the wedding for the bridesmaids dresses! You go for the the joining of the two people who love each other, two families joining, a celebration of new lives and, if you are single and lucky, getting a bridesmaid out of the ugly dress!
When I find myself seeing everything about something that is immensely popular as stupid... I recognize my failure to see how others see...
You may not like AI... you may feel competitive with it because you are chasing your dream your own way... but to not get that they are selling hope not singers and the cinderella dream and not commerce is to just completely miss it...
The fans of the show aren't dumb.... they know the flaws and failings... no need to remind them. We know Ryan Seacrest is a weenie... who could we get instead of him? Vince Gill is a great host, but he's busy!
As for Randy Jackson being a has been. Exactly. He HAS BEEN. He knows what its like...
so, no, you aren't too harsh at all... you just can't see it...
I remember taking a non linear math class once and one of the 'smartest guys' used to get furious at some of the problems because they just didn't go like he wanted them to... and the prof used to say 'folks who are stuck in thinking one way will not prosper here.'
(btw, daughtry did not get a better deal, his deal is with Simon Fuller... but it must have been a better deal than what Fuel offered him to join them!)
One last tiny point about the 'i'm not knocking parents who let their kids watch a show where a host tells someone that their weight will limit their career'. This is not why we watch the show, but without issues like this coming up and being a place where it can be discussed... what better way to discuss these issues? My experience growing up with coaches and teachers was that they could be pretty blunt with kids... not always positively.. some guys here think that is a good thing and is 'tough love.' I know enough about motivating people that I can usually find a different way... but, kids need to know the truth. The truth is (repeated research) that this stuff is a reality.
I want my kids to be successful and pursue their dreams and know how to do it without huge 'surprises'. Cruelty is never attractive, but having a character like Simon is a good thing because it doesn't just show him as an ogre but as a complicated and complex character...