Lou Bondì must be disappointed. The Bondiplus programme intended to be a firecracker ended up being a damp squib. His new hairstyle totally upstaged the supposedly ‘rebel’ Members of Parliament.
Instead of concentrating on what was irking the government backbenchers, viewers were mesmerised by the slicked back mounds of hair on Bondi’s head. As Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, Robert Arrigo and Franco Debono mouthed the usual platitudes about the PN parliamentary group headed by Lawrence Gonzi in Alex Ferguson mode, you could feel viewers switching off. Toeing the line and swearing undying loyalty to the boss does not make for riveting viewing. No wonder, our eyes kept wandering to those greased back curls.
Charlene Vella Mula is an aspiring singer who is making news for all the wrong reasons. She was one of the contestants in this year’s edition of the Konkors Kanzunetta Indipendenza. When a clip of her singing was uploaded onto Youtube, over 15,000 views were registered.
Then the comments started pouring in. They ranged from the mildly critical, to the obscene, to the viciously unkind. Someone said she looked like a sofa, someone else compared her to a doughnut. Yet another commenter said she must have swallowed Griz from Minibugz. References to Moby Dick, whales, and hippos were rife.
I couldn’t help but feel sorry for Charlene. If it was my daughter singing up there, I’d die a little inside every time some anonymous viewer posted a crushingly cruel remark about her. However, I like to think that I’d have advised her against making her debut in the way Charlene did.
Though she’s feisty and shows an admirable lack of self-consciousness, these qualities alone will not lead to success or excellence in a singing career. It is no use deploring the heartlessness of viewers and their tendency to pass judgment on what they see. That’s the whole point of the performing arts. Dancers, singers, and performers are there to entertain, inspire and enlighten. If the audience is left cold by their performance, it’s clear that something is not quite right. Saying that the audience is too critical is just an exercise in denial.
In Charlene’s case, derogatory comments were made about both her looks and her singing ability. The clip shows her sporting a low-cut top and tight leggings. They’re not flattering. And Charlene’s fans can bring up Pavarotti, Chiara, Demis Roussos and all other large singers, till the cows come home. There’s no comparison. These are singers whose talent transcends their looks and size.
When you’re listening to any one of them or to performers with star quality, you are transported to another place by the sheer power of their voice, and their looks become secondary to the whole experience, if not irrelevant. Nobody goes to an Elton John concert to drool over his physique or fine head of hair, but once he starts doing his stuff, the funny-looking man with big glasses and a weird array of headgear recedes into the background and his music takes centre stage.
If you can’t do that with the power of your voice alone, you have to rely on packaging – very attractive packaging. That’s why Cheryl Cole’s forgettable ‘Fight for this love’ will probably top the charts soon. The song sucks but Cole looks sensational. In an industry obsessed with size and beauty, looks may be a substitute for singing ability. If you have neither, it would be a good idea to look around for something else to do.
Charlene has got a head of corkscrew curls which she shakes around when belting out the lyrics of ‘Tort tà Min?’ – a song about drug and cigarette addiction. It’s not a feel-good song, but Charlene still smiles at times. Her voice is raspy and the overall effect is of an unpolished performance by an untrained singer. Granted, the quality of the clip may have contributed further to the negative impression which viewers may have gleaned, but still, it couldn’t have masked a truly great performance (which this definitely wasn’t).
Despite this, some people told Charlene to ignore the critical comments being posted. I think that this advice may be given by well-meaning people, but I find it just as unkind as some of the snide comments posted. That’s because it allows people like Charlene to continue living under the illusion that they are destined to be great singers, when it is clearly not the case. They may be wonderfully gifted in other ways, but not in this particular field. Why let them expend their energy trying to excel in an art form for which they are evidently ill-suited? Wouldn’t it be fairer to give a tactful but honest assessment of their abilities, instead of egging them on to further humiliation?
As columnist India Knight remarked in her piece last week, “We think we’re being kind, loving and supportive when we tell our children they can be anything they dream of being, but it’s not exactly telling them the truth, is it?”
By fostering the illusion that all contestants have what it takes to make it in the world of performing arts, they are being deprived of the opportunity to develop their talents in other areas.
Of course, the people organising these and other contests (watch the unintentionally hilarious Malta’s Top Model contest) don’t give much thought to any form of quality control or a good weeding-out process. I suppose they figure out that the more contestants vie for their poxy prizes, the better, and if the finalists are not specially gifted, or talented, or beautiful, they’ll still pass muster. It’s no wonder that there are so many mediocre performers out there.
cl.bon@nextgen.net.mt