Randy Jackson bashes musicals and showtunes... — Page 2

"...when Cowell or Jackson used terms like "musical theater", "Broadway", or "cabaret", what they really meant was that the performer in question had picked up bad, summer-stock performing habits. That the singer was performing the song in a highly technical and self-conscious way..."

Oh, I think the standard poses of "rock" performers are as technical and self-conscious as anything to which you might be referring. Stock things like a Mick strut, tossing the hair, Xtina finger flutters, Mariah hand melisma, Blues Brothers-style hopping, stock rap gestures - these have all become as phony, standardized, and meaningless as jazz hands.

The only difference is that the unimaginative herd still believe it's "hip" to posture in these 20-50 year old tired derivative ways. That's why they sing into beer bottles at bars, and put their neckties around their heads.

It would be like your parents (or grandparents) imitating Jolson in 1965 and thinking it made them cutting edge. The current state of pop culture is stuck in a tar pit of inertia.

Updated On: 1/26/12 at 03:23 PM

How many of your Idols wind up on Broadway, Randy? Hmm...

So musicals/showtunes don't appeal to some record producer who just sat through a MT-style performance from some no-talent who apparently can't differentiate between music styles and thinks a Broadway belter/crooner is what these POP/Rock producers are looking for.

What's the problem?

---

When was the last time an Idol winner actually became a success in the music industry? Carrie Underwood? And only Kelly Clarkson before her?

Maybe Randy needs to reconsider his tastes if so few of the winners actually become what the show's premise intends them to be.

---

Randy Jackson is simply not relevant...

"Some girl auditioned with WHEN YOU GOT IT, FLAUNT IT from The Producers, and Randy went on a whole rant on how 'showtunes turn him off, and he can't stand the vibrato of musical theater performers.'"

Well, Randy Jackson turns me off. However, as others have stated, he is entitled to his opinion, just as I'm entitled to mine. I personally think he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about.

The catch twenty-two of it, though, is that if "rock star" cliches adn posturing, which are still current and relevant, are no longer current and relevant, what IS the real, genuine and relevant presentational style of the era? IS there one?

One wonders if his reaction would had been different if she had sung "I'm Not Wearing Underwear Today" or "Totally F****d"

But seriously, he was just performing public service by warning people away from theater songs. After all, just look at how much it hurt these careers:

The Beatles - Till There Was You
Louis Armstrong - Hello Dolly
Barbra Streisand - People, Memory
Three Dog Night - Easy to Be Hard
Yvonne Elliman - I Don't Know How to Love Him
Fifth Dimension - Age of Aquarius/Let the Sunshine In, Light Sings
John Travolta/Olivia Newton John - Summer Nights
Judy Collins - Send in the Clowns
Dionne Warwick - I'll Never Fall in Love Again

And of course you'll never find Pete Townshend, Billy Joel or Green Day near a Broadway stage.

I believe Trask just mocked Mitchell's vibrato, but Mitchell didn't change it.

The whole concept, however, of "rock" vibrato being inherently different than other kinds of vibrato is utterly idiotic. Not all "rock" or pop performers use the same kind of vibrato.

Some people just need to pretend they know everything, when they really only know something.

The catch twenty-two of it, though, is that if "rock star" cliches adn posturing, which are still current and relevant, are no longer current and relevant, what IS the real, genuine and relevant presentational style of the era? IS there one?

Excellent question, darquegk! The answer won't be found in hip hop, a performance style that seems to be nothing BUT a series of poses.

Probably the real horse$hit is the 1960s' notion that there is such a thing as "natural", non-mannered singing. As Sondheim once remarked (in a completely different context), "singing is not a natural activity."

(For those who care, Sondheim was explaining why Method Acting principles do not work when applied to singing technique. He was talking about Harry Guardino.)

"My apologies, Gav, I didn't mean to imply that you implied that; I was just pointing out what seems to me to be a cultural blind spot - that people seem to think that "rock" performance is somehow more "now," "hip," "real," genuine, or relevant than any other applied performance style"

It actually has a term, "rockism" and is a belief that has existed since at least the late 60s. I always find it amusing when people complain about pop stars not writing their own material. Nobody feels that way about Elvis, or Sinatra or a million of pre Beatles performers. Singer/songwriters are great (sometimes) but you can also give credit to someone for being a great pop interpretator. Of course that's what most Idol performers are (minus the great).

There's a great book on the subject Faking It, which points out that Aretha Franklin and the Sex Pistols are just as much pop performers under huge amounts of marketing, producers, etc, as say Donna Summer (who wrote the majority of her hits anyway), etc.