Wednesday, May 20, 2009
A.I.2009 finale
posted at 4:19 PM |
Permalink |
If Dial Idol is right - and it has been correct this season every time I've checked - the voting difference between Kris Allen and Adam Lambert was 61.14 for Allen and 60.04 for Lambert. On the other hand, Idol Blog's 6000+ voters have it 51% for Lambert and 49% for Allen. The logical conclusion is that it's really really really really really close.
Which means that - as they will do anyway - the producers have the ultimate vote. As anyone who's watched the show for very long knows, it all depends on who they think will be the more reliable money-winner. I suppose Carrie Underwood is the ideal, if record sales and revenue are the measure, but whether that means calm and pleasant Allen or wild and pleasant Lambert, who knows. The producers seemed to annoint Lambert early and thoroughly, leading me to think they want to edge up their image, in which case it will be Lambert. But I may be wrong.
For a different take on the match-up, read Stephen Holden's article in the NYT this week. His points seem utterly ridiculous to me because, for one thing, they smack of academic English classes penchant for finding wildly symbolic meanings where none really exist. And they also reek of judgmentalism and assumed homophoia as well as disdain. I truly think we're all way beyond caring about a singer's sexual preference, for heaven's sake, don't you? And might not someone dislike someone's singing simply because they don't like it, not because they're homophobic and dislike eyeliner on men? And might not someone dislike someone's singing simply because they don't like it, not because they dislike whatever they think young white guys from Arkansas are like? Holden's piece is a nasty piece of journalism run wildly amok and deliberately and bogusly (is that a word?) stirring up controversy where none exists.
Which means that - as they will do anyway - the producers have the ultimate vote. As anyone who's watched the show for very long knows, it all depends on who they think will be the more reliable money-winner. I suppose Carrie Underwood is the ideal, if record sales and revenue are the measure, but whether that means calm and pleasant Allen or wild and pleasant Lambert, who knows. The producers seemed to annoint Lambert early and thoroughly, leading me to think they want to edge up their image, in which case it will be Lambert. But I may be wrong.
For a different take on the match-up, read Stephen Holden's article in the NYT this week. His points seem utterly ridiculous to me because, for one thing, they smack of academic English classes penchant for finding wildly symbolic meanings where none really exist. And they also reek of judgmentalism and assumed homophoia as well as disdain. I truly think we're all way beyond caring about a singer's sexual preference, for heaven's sake, don't you? And might not someone dislike someone's singing simply because they don't like it, not because they're homophobic and dislike eyeliner on men? And might not someone dislike someone's singing simply because they don't like it, not because they dislike whatever they think young white guys from Arkansas are like? Holden's piece is a nasty piece of journalism run wildly amok and deliberately and bogusly (is that a word?) stirring up controversy where none exists.
3 comments
< home >