Events | 2009.11.14
The Jedward paradox and what it means | Mark Lawson
The X Factor audience revolt may reflect anger at bankers – but it also suggests a format malaise
When talent shows – previously regarded as the epitome of cheap, cheesy 70s television – unexpectedly became the hottest genre of the 21st century, the political classes took a flattering interest in the phenomenon.
Party HQs mused aloud about how Westminster might tap into the enthusiasm for voting shown by young viewers of Strictly Come Dancing , The X Factor and Britain\'s Got Talent . Then, as these formats spread around the globe, some optimists even argued that the experience of making choices between candidates might popularise democracy in cultures resistant to the idea.
Regrettably, the reputation of wannabe shows as a model for political interaction has been irretrievably damaged by the latest series of The X Factor. The only democratic parallel would be the possibility of the British electorate conspiring to put the Monster Raving Loony party in power purely because it would really annoy the leaders of the main parties and the BBC.
And so to John and Edward Grimes , the tuneless crooners with electric-shock hairdos who have become the stand-out act in this year\'s X Factor, whose performances have brought something close to a grimace to Simon Cowell\'s face – a manoeuvre generally thought impossible because of Botox.
Yesterday, the Chinese ambassador to Britain intervened in the furore surrounding "Jedward", as the brothers are now known, with a letter to the Sun, denying earlier reports that the senior UK representative of the People\'s Republic had been irritated by hysterical fans of the twins outside the walls of the X Factor house, which abuts the embassy. Her Excellency Madam Fu Ying insists that she loves the show, a view which may further encourage political scientists to see the series as an antidote to tyranny.
The Chinese ambassador may not, however, realise that this year\'s show has become an exercise in anarchy rather than democracy, rather as Strictly Come Dancing did when viewers were determined to defy the expert judges, and on the most recent Britain\'s Got Talent when the audience eventually rebelled against Cowell\'s enthusiasm for Susan Boyle .
In one sense, a ballot-box analogy may apply. Electoral analysts have long argued that political candidates are increasingly judged on the power of their personal narratives and, especially, their success in overcoming an obstacle to reach the top: whether gender, race or poverty. In the same way, the Grimes twins have overcome drawbacks – such as the ability to sing consistently in tune – which would, in less egalitarian times, have doomed those aspiring to a musical career.
In a perverse version of the boost given to Margaret Thatcher and Barack Obama by being outsiders, Jedward\'s sheer unsuitability for what they are doing makes them more attractive candidates, their hopelessness nicely contrasting with the steely ambition of other aspirants.
But, mainly, viewers are backing Jedward because Cowell doesn\'t want them to. The massive support for John Sergeant , despite his dragging feet, was at least partly an expression of the audience\'s anger at the fakery scandals in TV. This attempt to sabotage The X Factor is a small-screen version of the revolt against financial fat-cats in a time of recession. Routinely placed high in lists of the richest and most powerful people in TV, Cowell is now being shown that money can\'t buy you control.
The spoilsports probably realise that any wiping of the smirk off Cowell\'s face will be temporary. The X Factor doesn\'t offer the opportunity to choose a completely nonmusical winner – the tactic used by the Britain\'s Got Talent audience to annoy the judges – and so wherever Jedward finish, Cowell will presumably sign them up for the lucrative novelty Christmas single they have in them before the programme and the viewers move on to next year\'s contenders.
But a talent show in which the votes are being cast sardonically or sentimentally is clearly in some kind of trouble, and there are signs that the enthusiasm for TV\'s number one genre is wobbling. Just in the time for the panto season, the BBC has more or less killed its golden goose, weakening its previously critic-proof hoofing show through panel-tampering, an arrogant head-to-head with ITV, and elongation of episodes.
The ratings are still robust – Strictly and The X Factor attracted a combined 20 million viewers last Saturday – but hit-entertainment formats (see Noel\'s House Party ) can go from all to nothing very quickly. There\'s a feeling now that only the lack of ambition and creativity caused by the funding crisis across the industry can keep talent shows as the reliable ratings-makers they have been since Will Young won Pop Idol in 2002.
Gordon Brown used to wish he could match the appeal of the TV voting shows. Soon, The X Factor and Strictly Come Dancing may start to worry that they have the appeal of Gordon Brown.
For more information, please visit
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/[...]/jedward-paradox-what-it-means
Instagram is adding automatic in-app text translation - The Verge views: 1523
Here’s a ‘Brand-New’ Massive Multilingual Dataset for Machine Translation views: 1509