Singapore Idol - not spectacular at all
Houston, we have a problem.
Singapore Idol has contraints.
1) Population size; it ain't big - and the Singapore talent pool may not be able to support a programme like this as regularly as the producers would like. As it stands, it seems that while showmanship is not in short supply, voice talent is and only Paul Twohill and Mathilda d'Silva can really sing.
2) Denial of the dynamics of disagreement: The judges are diplomatic and polite when they disagree. Ken Lim says it like he thinks it but he is likely to entertain because his view is independent. Florence Lian shows a deejay's ease - she is prompt and looks eager to engage you with her views. Most times though, the judges aren't prepared to put out their views,or thumb down a contestant's performance or for our entertainment destroy another judge's assessment as the American Idol judges do to each other. When it is bad, as if in anticipation of how the other judges or others might share the same views, they package their criticism nicely. You come away thinking they are "nice" people - nice to the contestants, and nice to each other. They look like they are withholding criticism too harsh or praise too gushing. The end result is a lukewarm engagement with the performance. Don't get me wrong - you can tell they are thinking and sometimes they look a trite too uncomfortable about having to say it.
Maybe this tells us that Singaporeans are basically not confrontational, and whatever the commercial package came with the Idol series, you can't expect professionals in the business to judge according to script. See, even I have a problem with dishing out direct criticism!
What has been gratifying about Singapore Idol:
As the previous instalment showed - the best singing talent won in the finals, despite what some naysayers were projecting about voters going for race. Taufik Batisah's win was gratifying - it showed the Singapore public voting en masse for a talent contest could vote discriminatingly. Let's hope it happens again!
Singapore Idol has contraints.
1) Population size; it ain't big - and the Singapore talent pool may not be able to support a programme like this as regularly as the producers would like. As it stands, it seems that while showmanship is not in short supply, voice talent is and only Paul Twohill and Mathilda d'Silva can really sing.
2) Denial of the dynamics of disagreement: The judges are diplomatic and polite when they disagree. Ken Lim says it like he thinks it but he is likely to entertain because his view is independent. Florence Lian shows a deejay's ease - she is prompt and looks eager to engage you with her views. Most times though, the judges aren't prepared to put out their views,or thumb down a contestant's performance or for our entertainment destroy another judge's assessment as the American Idol judges do to each other. When it is bad, as if in anticipation of how the other judges or others might share the same views, they package their criticism nicely. You come away thinking they are "nice" people - nice to the contestants, and nice to each other. They look like they are withholding criticism too harsh or praise too gushing. The end result is a lukewarm engagement with the performance. Don't get me wrong - you can tell they are thinking and sometimes they look a trite too uncomfortable about having to say it.
Maybe this tells us that Singaporeans are basically not confrontational, and whatever the commercial package came with the Idol series, you can't expect professionals in the business to judge according to script. See, even I have a problem with dishing out direct criticism!
What has been gratifying about Singapore Idol:
As the previous instalment showed - the best singing talent won in the finals, despite what some naysayers were projecting about voters going for race. Taufik Batisah's win was gratifying - it showed the Singapore public voting en masse for a talent contest could vote discriminatingly. Let's hope it happens again!
Comments