The Thrill is Gone: The American Idol and Dancing with the Stars Backlash

Since the Industrial Revolution, our culture has been driven by consumerism and consumption.  VHS became passé so we culturally moved on to the "superior" DVD.  The same argument can  be made for American Idol and Dancing with the Stars this year.  For American Idol, my belief is that the argument holds true as early as Season 5, but I won't get into that.  I don't think American Idol's problem this year is a true lack of talent (there are certainly contestants on the show who have vocal talent) rather the problem is that culturally, we're simply over it.  The newness has worn off and American Idol has become just another reality show. 

American Caterwauling

"This... is American Caterwauling" should be the way Ryan Seacrest introduces American Idol.

What's become clear to me is that I watch American Idol for vastly different reasons than the producers of the show intend (in a nod to Stuart Hall's encoding/decoding). I like the show and watch, but it's not because I am looking for the next great artist, but because it is so ingrained in our pop culture sensibility that to not watch is to cut yourself off from the "water cooler sessions" the following morning. With the exception of Kelly Clarkson, Fantasia Barrino (which I bought and promptly sold at a used music store), Jennifer Hudson and Allison Iraheta, I've not purchased music from any other American Idol winner/finalist. The singers I like (and whose CDs I have purchased) all have one thing in common: they are belters.

I'll tackle the last point first. I like a good belter as much as the next gay, but American Idol has suffered from the desire to applaud singers who employ what I call vocal pyrotechnics. (I know, the argument could be made that Jennifer Hudson was given the boot relatively early, but Fantasia, another belter, went on to win the competition in one of the most mismatched American Idol finals in history). When a singer can hit a "glory note" that is reason for us to applaud him or her -- foregoing any sense of nuance related to singing. When someone sits and sings a slow song, it's deemed "sleepy" by the judges. But when someone like Season 9 contestant Siobhan Magnus hits notes, we stand up, cheer and take notice.

siobhan 12 @ Yahoo! Video

I admit, Siobhan delivered a WTF moment for me last night and we collectively forgot about most of the contestants who came before (or after) her because we have been trained to focus on things like, "wow, did you hear that note?" "he has a great falsetto," etc. rather than that was a really solid vocal. It seems that we want/expect "good singing" to be loud and long. In other words, can you hit a note and then make it last until we think you are within seconds of passing out from air deprivation? The thing most of us remember from Mariah Carey's early career is her ability to hit the "dog whistle" note, not that she is really a great singer and interpreter of music.

Sex and the Singing: American Idol and Gender

The real competition portion of American Idol starts tonight. As such, there has (for whatever reason) been a blitz of American Idol judges giving interviews about the show. One such interview was Randy Jackson appearing on the Ellen Degeneres Show. And while the interview was fairly inane one comment he made struck me: he said that they (the judges) wanted a girl to win this year. (Skip ahead to 1:50 in the video below)

And when you think about him favoring a girl to win and why he might say that, one only has to look at American Idol's track record. As Jon Caramanica points out in his New York Times piece, Idol's track record as a bonafide star-making machine has been spotty at best with Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood the only winners who have emerged as real music stars. Other Idol successes include Chris Daughtry and Jennifer Hudson (although her singing success has been eclipsed by her success as an actress). So, it's really no wonder that Randy Jackson wants a girl to win (and my guess is that he'd like a white girl to win since Idol's success with girls of color has not been stellar either; see Fantasia and Jordin Sparks).

Arguably, American Idol has become less of a singing contest and more of a vehicle for exposure, thanks in large part to contestants who haven't even cracked the top 24 (or 36) like William Hung and General Larry Platt, but most damaging have been Chris Daughtry and Jennifer Hudson who finished seventh and fourth respectively -- who proved that you don't have to be named the next American Idol in order to achieve success. Jennifer Hudson went on to win almost every acting award imaginable for her role in Dreamgirls and Chris Daughtry, as front man of the band Daughtry, was one of the most successful artists of 2007.

With those two glaring exceptions to the rule and other Idol winners (and runner-ups) being dropped from their labels and heading to Broadway (Fantasia in The Color Purple, Ruben Studdard in Ain't Misbehavin', Diana DiGarmo in a host of Broadway productions, and Taylor Hicks in Grease) it makes sense that Idol would want to try to capture any remaining music industry cred by having a bonafide star emerge from the show. The problem isn't talent -- the person who emerges victorious on American Idol can always sing (despite the efforts of websites like Vote For the Worst) but that most bonafide musicians aren't auditioning for the show. When those who are voted off the show (or any reality show for that matter) claim that we'll hear from them again, in most cases we won't. And for those who thank their fans when they are voted off, you don't really have any fans. You have spectators and as we've seen with American Idol winners, just because millions of people voted for you to win the competition, those same millions are not going to go out and buy your record.

Pop Culture and the Familiar

As consumers of pop culture and media we often decry that we want something new and unique -- something we haven't seen before. But our consumption practices often tell us differently. When I looked at the grosses for Broadway shows in New York for the past week, I was struck at how few shows are original. In fact, of the top 10 grossing shows, only one, In the Heights, is an original show. The top 5? Wicked (based on a book), The Lion King and Billy Elliot (based on a movies), West Side Story (revival and a retelling of Romeo and Juliet) and Jersey Boys (based on songs made famous by The Four Seasons). One could certainly argue that Broadway theater is hardly the barometer of taste and class, so let's look at movies.

Avatar was such a worldwide hit that we are going to get a second cup of Avatar. Despite being essentially called a cinematic crap fest by most critics, Valentine's Day beat expectations to be the number one film at the box office last week largely because we "know" the boldface stars whose names appear on the marquee. We are constantly subjected to movies based on books, stage musicals (mostly with little success) and remakes of old movies (see Eat, Pay, Love; Iron Man 2, and Alice in Wonderland, just to name a few).

We even see this replication of the old in music. We Are The World was remade to show support for Haiti, Alicia Keys "remade" Empire State of Mind without the rap from Jay-Z. And it extends outside of rap or R&B. Even Feist remade Nina Simone's See Line Woman as Sea Lion Woman (all in the pronunciation, I guess).





We often reject things that are new (contrary to the lip service we pay to wanting new things). With very few exceptions, television repeats the same formula. How many shows have we seen that employ the hot wife/sloppy husband construct? How many four female friends (the smart/witty one, the slutty one, the dumb one and the bitchy one) have we seen? Even one of my current favorite shows, Glee is a bit of a rehash in the sense that it is pretty close in premise to High School Musical.

All this is not to say that a rehash or cover or remake is inherently bad, but it does beg the question: where's all the new stuff that we are supposed to consume. Or maybe dissonance theory has it right because it asserts that new information causes people mental discomfort.

New Blog: American Idol and Celebrity Familiarity

First and foremost, the word "celebrity" is being used very loosely when talking about American Idol -- it is more appropriate to call them celetoids because their fame is most often compressed and concentrated. More brilliantly put (thanks to Chris Rojek), "celetoids are the accessories of cultures organized around mass communications and staged authenticity." But that is not the purpose of this blog post. It's to talk about the idea of celebrity and familiarity as it relates to American Idol. As I sat watching American Idol last night I realized that the show is not necessarily about singing talent. Presumably as the judges whittle the contestants down to the 24 finalists, they all have some degree of talent. But as I watched last night's two-hour episode (thank god for the DVR!) I realized how little singing there was and how much "back story" there was or humanizing the contestants. So we hear more about the girl who has brothers with Down Syndrome or the guy whose wife delivered a baby while hew as away at his audition for American Idol. Which begs the question: Why do we care?

The answer is that in our culture we have a desire to "know" celebrities -- which is why there is no shortage of entertainment media that look at the minutiae of a celebrity's life so we can see how they are "just like us" -- except more talented and wealthier, but they're just like us! But what we never (or rarely) consider is that these people (through the producers of American Idol) are framing their celebrity for us. The theory is that we are more apt to buy music from (or at least vote for) this person if we know that they overcame some adversity or if they are a "good guy or gal." But as we have seen on several occasions when dealing with the celetoids of American Idol, long lasting fame is often fleeting. Anyone remember Tamyra Gray from Season 1 or Latoya London from Season 3? How about John Stevens, also from Season 3? All have released records and none have achieved anything that could be called success as singers. (Tamyra Gray is allegedly writing and producing and Latoya London was in The Color Purple -- it seems theatre/Broadway seem to be the refuge of Idol contestants -- see Diana DiGarmo, Ace Young, Taylor Hicks, Fantasia, Ruben Studdard, Frenchie Davis, Clay Aiken and probably a ton more that I can't remember.

American Idol and The Carnival

I have reluctantly been watching American Idol this season. If I'm truly honest with myself, I watch it more out of habit than actually deriving any sense of enjoyment at seeing the "next great pop star" born before my eyes. Now, don't get me wrong, I am fully willing to get into the TV gutter by watching shows like America's Next Top Model (although the winner never becomes a "top model"). But each year, there seems to be more of an emphasis on the bad, grotesque or belligerent rather than necessarily the talented.

Watching American Idol this year I have been struck by Mikhail Bakhtin's thoughts on the Carnavalesque. "Bakhtin likens the carnivalesque in literature to the type of activity that often takes place in the carnivals of popular culture. In the carnival, as we have seen, social hierarchies of everyday life—their solemnities and pieties and etiquettes, as well as all ready-made truths—are profaned and overturned by normally suppressed voices and energies. Thus, fools become wise, kings become beggars; opposites are mingled (fact and fantasy, heaven and hell)."

What's happened is that people like William Hung and most recently Larry Platt have become the "stars" of American Idol rather than the ones who have "real talent." And while William Hung's (and undoubtedly Larry Platt's) star will fade, so too has Ruben Studdard's and Clay Aiken's (the winner and runner-up, respectively, of Season 2 of American Idol).

Bakhtin's idea that we focus on the grotesque, the sensual, the embodied and the excessive, really speak to our celebrity-obsessed culture where novelty often outweighs any discernible level of talent.