Sanjaya has survived yet another week on American Idol. What is America thinking?
Good Question. There is something going on beyond limited singing skills and a devotion to seemingly more and more bizarre hair styles at each performance. What drives the Sanjaya Machine?
A few educated guesses...
1. / His story is endearing. He's a 17-year-old who somehow made it to the hottest TV show in North America. He was devistated when his sister failed to make the cut, but has continued in competition. By becoming the lightening-rod for criticism on his performances, he has carved out the obvious "underdog" role among this year's competitors. And, let's face it; Among this year's crew, he may be the only one with a story.
2. / He's cute, in an "odd" sort of way. When I watch Sanjaya sing, he seems like a living caracture in action. His mouth and eyes in particular seem exagerated, as if drawn by a sketch artist(I suspect that a young Jerry Lewis [mid- to late-1950's era Jerry]clone could do some serious damage on the show. Especially if, unlike the real Jerry, he could actually sing...). And that hair! Early on, Sanjaya must have realized that the viewing audience would need some kind of "hook" to remember him by (Unlike Blake Lewis, who uses his "human beat-box" routine in almost everything he performs, he picked a constantly changing hairstyle.If you realize that you may not be the strongest singer, an Idol entrant can do worse than using his or her hair as a weapon...). The total package is memorable [think Rings Starr or, for children of the 80's, Boy George].
3. / He's non-threatening. This may be his strongest advantage. Ever since Lisa Simpson was first seen reading an issue of "Non-Threatening Teen Boy Idols" magazine, it's become obvious that appealing to the "tween" market [girls 8-14] is just good business. Sanjaya comes off as a "buddy", a "pal", not the teenager to start the "dangerous" hormones that scare most parents half to death.He's polite on TV, taking even the worst criticism from Simon Cowell in a respectful manner [Simon seems to have thrown in the towel on the Sanjaya Phenomonon; His most recent critique was along the lines of 'It doesn't matter what you sing, nobody really cares anymore, anyway'. And, in the interest of fairness, it should be noted that Sanjaya does seem to be improving from week to week. Or are we just getting, like Simon, more accepting of the Phenomonon?].
4. / His [Apparent] Fan Base, the already-referrenced "tweens" and Grannies, kept John Stevens on the show much longer than his talent should have allowed. John Stevens grew up, and still lives, as far as I know, just outside of Buffalo, NY, our home base. He is, by all accounts, pleasant and gracious. But there was NO WAY he should have lasted on Idol as long as he did. There seems to be much of the Stevens Factor about Sanjaya.
Could Sanjaya Win It All? In a season when there seem to be no compelling options, maybe. Will he have a career? He wouldn't be the first "low talent, high attraction factor" performer to do so, if he does...
Quoting Jim Morrison, "...the little girls understand".
-Mike Riley
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Every Generation Sends A Hero Up The Pop Charts
Posted by Mike Riley at 2:50 AM 0 comments
Labels: "tweens", American Idol (yet again), Sanjaya Malakar, The Sanjaya Machine, The Stevens Factor
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Cats In The Cradle
In case you haven't noticed, many, if not most, people are crazy about their pets. If you want some idea of HOW crazy they are, do a search on "pet toys". Given my residence's frame of reference, I limited my check to just "cat toys"; the computer gasped once or twice, as if straining under a heavy load, then came back with a mind-boggling 27 MILLION references! The on-going tainted pet food crisis has led to many uneasy households here in North America, as well as real sorrow in the homes where a pet fell victim to the bad food. Yes, it's safe to say we love our pets. And why not? For many people, they offer companionship, happiness and, yes, entertainment [if all those features on "America's Funniest Home Videos" is any indication].
If you've actually gone as far as to click on the link to my place of employment [see below], and even further, checked out my bio there, you know that the Woman I Love and I are cat owners. It's not that we dislike dogs; we just don't have proper room for them in our apartment. So we have cats. We started with three: Scoot Anne, Adios Andrew, and Get Away [Gettie, to her small circle of friends]. We loved and cared for them until, sadly, they all passed away, over a period of about 18 months. When we were down to our last feline [Scoot Anne, for the record], TWIL was adamant that she didn't ever want any more cats, no how no way. Then, we heard from a friend, who volunteered at the SPCA. There was a cat their, about a year old. While the other cats would perk up when people came to look, he sat quietly in the back of his cage. He ate, and seemed healthy, but he had lost the will to, well, be cat-like. For a cat, there could be no greater loss. Our friend described him as "despondent". Well, that was a word the two of us could understand!
When we saw him, we were entranced. He was white from head to foot [paw, really]. We had him taken out of the cage, and brought to a "meeting room". He was a little more playful than he had been in the cage, but he still seemed sad. Then again, WE could be sad on certain days. After a very brief conference [more like looking at each other and nodding], we decided to adopt him. I forget the name he came with, except to remember it was unimaginative. He soon became Malachi, named for the author of the last book of the Old Testament [I later found out the name is not uncommon among men in Ireland. Works...].
Part of the reason we adopted Malachi was a belief that Scoot Anne, bereft of her original companions, might have been lonely. It turned out that nothing could be further from the truth. Indeed, for the too-short remainder of her life, she frequently was tormented by Mally's desperate attempts at "making friends". Then again, she seldom attacked him, settling instead for a deep, womanly growl to keep him in his place, and out of hers.
After Scootie left us, we were glad we still had a cat. Malachi grew in age, in girth, and in love for us.Then. last year, TWIL met a woman while volunteering for Meals On Wheels. She had a beautiful black, white and grey long hair, name of Webster. We agreed that, if anything happened to her, we would take care of Webster. You can almost predict what's going to happen next, can't you? That "something" happened, and we became Webbie's adoptive "parents". After a surprising short period of adjustment, the two became like brothers. They'd spend their mornings [after breakfast, of course] watching the pigeons outside the window in our living room [here is one of the few times I really wish I could add pictures. The view of them, tails flicking as they watched "Must See Pigeon TV", is something to marvel at]. They raced around the house, looking for all the world like two cats in an animated cartoon. We took to calling them "The Brothers".
Just this week, though, the picture changed again. A long-time friend of the family needed someone to take care of her cat, at least temporarily. This boy is also black and white, with his white patch looking for all the world like a shirt under a tuxedo. His name is Mister Buddy. He's still a little scared to be around the brothers; they, for their part, are taking a magnificent air of indifference to the new family member. TWIL keeps saying, "Three cats. And you [pointing at me]. Oh, no!"
But, for the record, I think she'll get over it...
Posted by Mike Riley at 2:45 AM 0 comments
Labels: "The Brothers", Cats, cutsie-pie entry
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Get It Right The First Time
Blogging being mainly a "young person's sport" [with many notable exceptions], many of you probably aren't in the habit of reading newspapers [Given the state of newspapers lately, I see why...]. This is, as you'd expect, a matter of some concern to newspaper owners and publishers [by no means usually the same person. Check a masthead sometime and you'll see what I mean. If you don't know what a "masthead" is, do a little research.], especially since the average newspaper reader is old enough to "haze" incoming members of the AARP [see entry "(I'm An) Old Man, Take A Look At My Life". It's in the archives somewhere...].
Anyway, one typical feature of a newspaper [along with the masthead] is a section usually headed "Corrections", or something similar. Most days, if the paper is paying attention, the space is filled with a statement along the lines of, "This paper will correct substantive errors when made aware of them.", along with some means of contacting it.Such a phrase, or at least an effort to be as accurate as possible, should be a major part of any non-fiction blog. I mean, rumors are the BIG FUN on the blogosphere. But they should at least be identified as such. People have a nasty tendency to trip and stumble over such thickets on the Information Superhighway.
Case in point: your humble author. Yesterday, I wrote a wide-ranging [all right: rambling] entry. In it, based on an item I spotted but didn't read in another blog, I mentioned that the new US $1 coins were NOT stamped with the long-time slogan "In God We Trust" [Bonus Question: Why is the phrase on US money, and when did it begin to appear? A good Google search should answer that one...]. I have since seen a photo of a stack of the new coins. Stamped on the edge is "In God We Trust", along with the national motto, "E Pluribus Unum", a phrase which appears on the $1 bill.My apologies to, first, my blogophiles, then to the US Mint [I said in the entry that I was "Bothered" by the phrase's exclusion], and then, I guess, to anyone else who feels they need an apology [Wouldn't you really rather have a hug? Almost everybody likes hugs...].
That's it for now. Have a nice reading opportunity...
Posted by Mike Riley at 2:49 AM 0 comments
Labels: AARP, apologies, corrections, hugs, mistakes, newspapers, obscure referrences to Neil Young songs
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Do The Right Thing
Warning: this is a "variety" posting, with thoughts on several different subjects. If any of them bore you, try another one. If they ALL bore you, try one of the many fine sex-oriented sites that are a proud part of our blogosphere...
I don't know how other bloggers run their sites. I can only speak from my own experiences. But something tells me that many bloggers have the same problems, concerns, etc, when it comes to their sites. We all want to be read [otherwise, this effort is equal to a certain sexual act specifically criticized in the Old Testament (see the story of Onan for further details)], we all want to be a "Blog Of Note" [and who do you have to know for that to happen?], and we all want those counters we got as html code from other sites to move upward, dammit!
And yet, how many of us do the right things? Not me, bucco! I read the advice blogs [who, by the way, made these people "experts" (except, of course, for the technical sites, which usually are really written by experts)?], and they suggest things like "write new entries daily". I don't know about you, but I can only really write when I'm enthused, annoyed, or amused by something. One of my favorite writers, Dorothy Parker, once said that only the truly mediocre are at their best each day [I guess I don't think I'm mediocre. I may not be good, but I'm not mediocre. Maybe that should become this site's new slogan...].
They also suggest putting photos on the site. Well, I STILL don't have a digital camera, or a scanner, so adding illustrations is out for now [Boy, this is turning into a real "pitiful me" session. Maybe I should add a music html, so this page could play weepy music when you read it. I am such a wuss...].
So, I try.I go to other people's blog, looking for ideas. (Most of the ideas are unsuitable for a family blog. I've got to stop going to those sex blogs. Then again, most of them DO have pictures, and update themselves daily. You don't suppose the topic has anything to do with their success? Nahhh...) I'm not going to give up. I'll just push "quality" over "quantity" [This should not be taken as criticism of those sites that have both. I don't need any more enemies.].
Random news items that got my attention in recent days:
- a survey notes that, by the year 2015, 60 percent of couples will sleep in separate bedrooms [Who knew The Woman I Love and I would be trend-setters?]
- NASA announced that "seas" of methane or ethane may exist on Saturn's largest moon [I was hoping for Diet Pepsi, but I'm no scientist...]
-Haliburton, the company connected with vice-president Dick Cheney, has decided to move its headquarters to Dubai [Great, now we won't even be able to get the money back in taxes!]
- The new $1 US coins do not have the long-time slogan "In God We Trust". [It really bothers me, but, since the government of the moment doesn't seem to live by that principle, I guess it's only fair.].
Well, that's all I've got. Maybe I'll try again tomorrow...
Maybe not.
Posted by Mike Riley at 2:29 AM 0 comments
Labels: a really poor entry, blogging [not logging], coins of the realm, Haliburton, malaise, moving those counters upward-dammit
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
Dark Side Of The Moon
Posted by Mike Riley at 3:30 AM 0 comments
Labels: Buffalo building [and radio] history, Haiku, silence, winter [again]
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Idol Attraction [no, I don't know of a song by that name. They can't all be song titles or lyrics. Well, they could be. But this one isn't...]
I sometimes ask myself why I spend so much time following "American Idol". In a way, it makes some sense, of course. "Idol" is the most-watched show on American television during its annual run. Each season has its own dynamic, its own little dramas. But sometimes I feel the same as spectators at a slow-motion train wreck must feel. I know what horrors will surely follow, and yet I cannot bear to turn my head.
This same Internet that you and I are communing on was rocked last week by reports that a series of photos had surfaced, revealing [for that is the seemingly-correct word] "Idol" contestant Antonella Barba in a variety of poses. In none of them can she be said to be displaying the kind of discretion that the shows producers or the FOX Network would like. In at least two of them she is performing an act that most of us [the opinions of one former President of the United States notwithstanding] would call a sex act. The show and FOX are withholding comment, at least of this writing. Several of Barba's friends are saying the photos aren't of her and, given the odds that someone out there must look like Barba [pretty good, given the world's population], it's possible that the whole thing is a hoax.
Still, pretending for the moment that the snaps are of her, the matter does raise a question or two. Discuss:
1. / Having been burned in a similar case once before [see Frenchie Davis. All she did was take off her shirt, albeit at an adult web site, and she was forced off the series], doesn't someone check on the chance of photos like these in some contestant's closet? Was Ms. Barba not forthcoming about the existence [or possible existence] of such material? Indeed, considering the state of camera technology today, was she even aware that such photos had been taken?
2. / If the photos were taken for non-commercial reasons, even if Barba was aware of it, shouldn't she have had the right to assume that they would remain private? Given the sad state of the world today, how could she have assumed that? Should she be punished for someone else's gross betrayal of privacy, not to mention trust [see next question]?
3. / Again assuming the photos are genuine [as of this writing, still not proven or admitted to by anyone, please remember], what happens next? Does Barba lose her seat on "Idol" [given the Davis case, a distinct possibility]? Do the producers, claiming the photos were not intended for financial gain, ignore the whole thing [given "Idol"'s appeal to pre-teens, not a likely result]? If she is excused, does Davis have grounds for a lawsuit [given our litigious society, probably]?
You see? Not even a month into the final rounds, and already a compelling storyline!
And you wonder why we watch? How could we not? (Please send suggestions for that last question as "Comments". I need to quit, but I'd settle for cutting down...)
Posted by Mike Riley at 1:55 AM 0 comments
Labels: American Idol, Antonella Barba, Frenchie Davis, Photography, Useless Obsessions
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Color Him Love
I seem to have an odd attitude about death, at least compared to many people I know. Oh, I don't for a moment think that I'll escape the embrace of the Grim Reaper. I don't have a secret hiding place in mind to avoid the Rapture. I don't plan to have my head amputated at the end, in hopes that future generations can cure what ails me and place me in a new body [not that there's anything wrong with that...].
But I also don't have a mental [or actual] list of death anniversaries. While I do attend funerals, memorial services and burials of those who are important in my life, I don't carry a lot of memories of those activities in my head. I don't visit grave sites, except to accompany others.In short, I sort of ignore the whole death process. But I'm not ignoring the regular reminders of mortality. I just prefer to remember people as alive.
My father died five years ago yesterday. I'd forgotten that fact, until The Woman I Love reminded me of it. She loved him, as I did, and holds him up to me from time to time as a positive role model. Actually, even if he hadn't been my father, I'd agree that his life was one to be emulated.
He raised five children from the 40's through the 70's. And he did raise us, along with our mother [also deceased], despite working the night shift for most of his employed life. When extra money was needed, he worked a variety of odd jobs. He drove taxi cabs. He delivered specialty newspapers to newsstands around Buffalo. He was a night nurse, and an aide, at Buffalo's Veterans' Hospital for most of his working career, before taking training and becoming a prosthetics builder, designer, and fitter for his last few years of work [He switched because I, the youngest, was going away to college, and he wanted to make sure someone was home at night with my mother.].
Despite working all night, he always made it to our moments of [to us, anyway] glory that took place during the day. He backed up my mother's parenting decisions, made in his absence. He was a god example in many ways. He ran our church's weekly bingo for years. He became a church trustee, replacing my mother when she died. He was an active volunteer in the community, both during and after his work career. He was patient when he should have been, slow to anger always, loving and caring for Mom and us kids.
But while I try to emulate those things, none of them is the quality of his that I admire most. To me, the most admirable and emulatable [if that's a word; I expect you know what I mean] quality of my father was that he was the least judgemental person I've ever seen.
I'm sure my father had opinions on life's events. It's hard to be alive and not have them. But, if they were critical, or even just not supportive, he kept them to himself. Who among us can honestly put that skill on a resume? We're smart enough not to put down those who could hurt us down the road. But how many of us can say they've never taken the opportunity to "kick someone when they're down", either in person or to someone else?
My father was old and sick before his passing. He was in pain. His body was beginning to break down. It was time for him to be with God. But there are still days when I wish he were here, teaching his lessons about acceptance, about being supportive, about love [I also wish that I had inherited his amazing skill for repairing mechanical things. But sadly, the tool-skills gene must have skipped at least one generation.].
I loved that man. I miss him still. I suspect I always will...
Posted by Mike Riley at 1:17 AM 0 comments
Labels: families, fatherhood, love, parents, tool-skills
