Idol Quickies: August 4, 2010 — The GET A LIFE Edition

I agree, the show is getting stale. But that’s not unexpected. It’s really an aged show at this point, and not everything can stay at the top of the hill for now.

The reactionary impulse isn’t the right one. For one, most people complaining about those seasons usually don’t seem to bring up how much a lot of the earlier seasons sucked, mostly in terms of talent and judging. If the show went back to Seasons 1, 2, 3, and probably 4, AI9 would easily lose its “worst season ever” crown. Yeah, when the contestants were great, they could be pretty great, but by far and in large CSPAN was less awkward.

Looking back to successful seasons in the minds of the viewers is tough, because the current viewership tends to have rose-colored glasses on. S7 and S8 were great seasons in terms of talent and in terms of following the Idols afterwards, but as actual seasons they were flawed by terrible production decisions (anyone remember S8 Wildcard round?) and obvious biases of the production. That gets brushed over for the invested fans, but a lot of those uninvested fans decided to take their time elsewhere during that season, so that’s not helping overall numbers.

I agree that the best bet at this point is simply to keep up and keep moving forward, and actually listening to what the audience has to say about the material, for one, and noting the importance of a diverse, strong cast (as complicated as that is, it’s the right impulse for a TV show). Otherwise, it’ll be done very, very soon. If that’s not already inevitable.

Oh, and a note on current material; I think someone’s said this upthread, but the problem is AI always courted and accumulated an audience that was never talented. If you look at the favorite contestants with massive fanbases, they’ve not all been what one might describe as current in style (which tells me in part that all that talk of little girls doing the voting? Utter bullshit).

Now, I’m not sure that being current in style would always be a bad thing if you were otherwise somehow a cougar-commodity; Daughtry wasn’t rock, but he was current in his own way, as was Cook, and even if neither began to remotely approach “cutting-edge”, you could hear artists like them on the radio. But what the AI audience has appreciated is more or less tailored to the acceptable taste level of the cougar audience, and it’s only on the occasional overlap that we get a “current” contestant.

“Given the state of current pop music, they really ought to ditch the audition process altogether and treat it as a modeling contest. Anyone can be autotuned or just lip-synch… it’s not like freaking Katy Perry can actually sing. And the dance-crap and hip-hop that dominates top 40 radio doesn’t actually need a real singer anyway. I mean, please, Rihanna? Can’t sing. Keshit? Ditto. Jason DeRulo? Who knows, it’s autotuned to hell and back.”

Sorry that I’m not a good block quote person. I will note that the artists mentioned are not really all the same kind, but all are indeed hard to replicate on Idol. Idol has never really begun to approach creating a pop star (Rihanna, Ke_ha), and I’d argue it can’t by format; Idol wants it’s artists to be relateable and defines its core to be “from one of the masses”, where being a pop star entails creating a bizarre, heightened character narrative. (Katy Perry kisses girls and likes it, Ke_ha does more than that… you know, that thing.) The more hip-hop scene… well, the problem is that a lot of those artists thrive on creativity, something Idol never will be able to give.

The issue isn’t whether they can sing, IMO, it’s that Idol never could create an effective individual story or presona to sustain that kind of success and presence. They tried with Adam, based entirely around his sexuality, but I’d argue that really didn’t work too well.

“I think a woman will win when a woman is so brilliant people would be crazy not to vote for her. In three seasons I don’t think we’ve really seen that.”

This will never happen. Ever, ever, ever. Why would that be compelling television? If someone’s so good that they don’t need your help, they’re not going to be great TV or a strong candidate. You see this in politics, you see this in realty TV, really in any kind of voting scenario. It’s, IMO, why Crystal didn’t win, as well as Melinda.

And, honestly, the issue is that a woman has to be “so brilliant” that people would be crazy would have to vote for her. Kris and Cook never had to be (both were amongst the best of the season for me, but I wouldn’t have thought someone not voting for them was crazy). Archie and Adam never had to be to get to the finale. And yet Allison Iraheta has to be? Why? She was certainly in that category, and yet never considered a legit threat to win. Why, gender aside?

A woman could, possibly, theoretically, win, if a whole hell of a lot goes her way and it’s not just an issue of being too good. But I can’t see it actually happening in any realistic world.

Agree, auntieaimee. The problem is, if you’re doing a Heartless every week, Heartless isn’t Heartless. In other words, if Lee had pulled out even, say, a “Midnight Train to Georgie”, it would have been considered a defining moment of the season for him. In Crystal’s case, it just looked like another piece in the catalog.

As to AI; no. Kelly was the definition of a surging dark horse, and for the longest time Tamyra was probably the presumptive winner. (Pretty much right up until she got booted). Justin, too, was considered a legit shot, despite having no performances that warranted that. (More or less the Danny Gokey arc, but without the hate)

Here’s what I’m trying to say. We can say “oh, X female didn’t win because of certain qualities, and Y male was good enough”. And, yeah, sure, every case has its influencing factors, and I analyze them way too much as is. But, for example, would those personality issues that Allison had would have killed the run of Adam at four and lead to a host of B3 visits? No; his fans would have ignored them and he would have skated right on by. And should we say Allison wasn’t good enough? Because I’d argue she was.

In other words, there were contributing factors to anyone’s fall, but let’s not pretend that they’re all equal in all people.

If we’re talking about Streisand-level… no, I just don’t think so. I’d go back to Melinda Doolittle, who really vocally was just her own deal. Even if Melinda had her “flaws” that were poked to death, the overall bottom line was so far ahead that it wasn’t even funny (unless you were a Blake fan, who was working on a whole new scale at the same time, and even so the overall consensus wasn’t on his side).

And as to charisma and talent… I don’t know. I mean, was David Archuleta so astoundingly charismatic and so obviously gifted that it elevated him beyond mere mortals like Brooke White? Or, hell, even Syesha Mercado? I don’t see that much of an evident difference that doesn’t predicate charisma by the result it had on a particular kind of audience member… but then you have to ask the obvious question.

You know, I didn’t see Glee. I wasn’t really looking for them either, because I hate Glee, and I think they were there at a different day than I was? (I only had a one day pass with Saturday, spent walking around the convention floor like an idiot; it was the first time I’d ever gone)

Ah, that too, come to think of it.