America's Got Talent disproves its own name
[Editor's note] Let me preface this post by saying that I was not a season-long watcher of America's Got Talent. For the most part, I think the show is pretty near awful. From its host, to the judge's table (Howie Mandell, really?!), to the hodgepodge of contestants, it's all a mess in my opinion.Enter Prince Poppycock.
With his pompadour wigs and glitter suits, I was hooked from first sight! Charming, talented, clever, and snarky. In many ways, he did to for America's Got Talent what Adam Lambert did for American Idol. Mr. Poppycock came like a breath of fresh air to a show that was gasping for it. And just like Mr. Lambert, Prince Poppycock was shut out of the winning spot by a talentless hack.
Enter Michael Grimm.
As People reports: In a surprise development, Michael Grimm — the Mississippi blues singer with the hard-luck back story — was named the winner of America’s Got Talent last night, besting favorite Jackie Evancho, the 10-year-old opera phenom with the preternaturally mature voice. Prince Poppycock didn't win, but I fully expected that. Greatness is rarely understood in its time. But to crown Mr. Grimm the winner over Jackie Evancho? That's just cruel and unusual.
Now, I'm sure Mr. Grimm is a delight. But was he the most talented one of the Top 4 last night? I think not. His victory is yet another glaring example of America's obsession for glorifying the mediocre. As I've written about before, the perspective of the voting public in this country is severely skewed. We like to make celebrities out of people who either don't deserve it (i.e. the Jersey Shore cast, the Kardashians) or deserve it for all the wrong reasons (i.e. Lindsay Lohan, Terry Jones).
All this begs to ask a bigger question: if we keep aiming low for role models, where can we possibly go as a nation?
Comments
- The sights are good - the target just moved...or more importantly, WAS moved and replaced by another target that no one, really, was all that concerned about. Did Michael Grimms REALLY get more votes then Prince Poppycock? I'm willing to entertain that fantasy...it can be almost considered within the realms of reason as Michael Grimms was an esthically neutral base (i.e. - nondescript) so anyone could relate to him in some form and fashion like anyone can write on a blank sheet of paper. He was a 'safe choice'.
- Now, did he get more votes then Jackie Evancho?...with all the hype, publicization, tv specials and sensationalism promoting her with millions of hits on her YouTube clips? Michael Grimms got MORE votes then her...really? No, seriously...what was the question again? Look, I'm not a narcist...being a fan of John Quale (a.k.a. - Prince Poppycock), I fully expected him to win. However, I'm not so dense at to believe that the outcome on AGT was nothing more then staged.
- My case in point, if Michael Grimms was really THAT good...why are they still talking about Jackie Evancho on the news - Michael who? 'Nuff said...
M.D.
Furthermore there was sabotage before the final, right up the last minute before Prince Poppycock hit the stage. And he was on a 'hit list' of sorts aimed at flustering him and making him look stressed. The performance he put on was not the intended one. Huge changes had to be made at the last minute. He was compelled to sing a song he already knew that had not been performed yet even though he KNEW it wasn't right for his voice. He troopered on in spite of it all and, like Vegas, did the best he could because "the show must go on."