Territorial Bloggings

*THUD*

That, I knew, was the collective sound of jaws dropping amongst all of the AI nation, and particularly amongst Constantine Maroulis’s fanbase (aka the Constantiniacs).

I also knew that it was only the calm before the storm of outrage that would erupt from the Constantiniacs, as they began to process & try to come to grips with the “hows” and “whys” of his elimination.

I was right. You only need check out reactions like those found here, here, and here to see why. [Please note that I hold Theresa & Terrie in the highest of esteem, but in this case I think they're overreacting...]

Now, was I surprised by the way the results show unfolded? Of course. After all, my review of this week’s performance show made it quite clear that I thought Scott deserved to go home. However, a careful reading of that review (particularly Constantine’s section) will yield the information necessary to help put the actual results into proper perspective. Thus, while the unfolding of the show was dramatic & certainly surprising, the actual result of Constantine being eliminated was not.

There are two ways to view the AI competition, at least in terms of the weekly voting: Micro & Macro.

A micro view will yield a voting decision based purely on a single week’s performance, and not taking into account any previous performances. Indeed, there could be a significant & growing contingent of “micro” voters over the course of an AI season, as new viewers are drawn into vortex of AI fandom & involvement. These folks do not have the context/baggage of contestant backstories, and so they will vote based on a single performance. (Note: there are also those folks who are “micro” voters based on principle, but I think that they are a very small subset of the “micro” voting bloc…)

A macro view yields a voting decision based on the entire historical context that an individual has developed over the course of their AI viewing involvement. At the most extreme, “macro” voters develop fierce loyalties to a single contestant, helping that contestant build up a loyal fanbase that can keep them safe during “off” weeks. There’s also a significant contingent (and this is where I would include myself…) that less intensely takes into account the whole of a contestant’s performances over time, creating sort of a rolling average that informs their idea of who deserves to get votes.

The way that AI voting is set up, it precludes the behavior of directly voting against someone you dislike; rather, it encourages “positive” voting. “Negative” voting is only possible via indirect means, and cannot be accurately targeted. Could voting fraud be perpetrated by the producers? Sure, anything’s possible. I just don’t think it’s likely. Neither do I think it likely that the producers can/could unduly influence voting trends, and I’m pretty darned confident in stating that the only influence the judges have is that of a reverse-psychology type (e.g., Simon says, “X, you need to pack your bags!” like he did with John Stevens, Nikki McKibbin, Josh Gracin, Jasmine Trias, and (this season) Scott & Anthony…). And even then, IMO, the power that reverse-psychology has tends to diminish as the competition progresses.

So, in terms of Constantine, what does the preceding verbiage mean? Well, I think it means this:

• Micro voters saw Constantine’s performance and were quite underwhelmed by it. They heard the judges pan the performance as being a sub-par effort from a good performer.
• Macro voters of the fanbase persuasion saw a performance that they liked, because it was done by Constantine, but one which didn’t trip their emotional triggers enough to compel them to vote — i.e., they liked it enough not to be worried that he might be eliminated, a worry that would’ve driven them to cast protective votes.
• Macro voters of the (for lack of a better appellation) average persuasion saw a performance in which Constantine regressed, back to his semifinal days of indecisive performances (e.g., the Police cover). For me, Constantine was never a rocker, not truly. He is a performer, and a talented one. He has an ability to portray certain genres quite well, the more theatrical the better (this, perhaps, is why he did so well at the Boston Conservatory of the Arts, and in the traveling company of Rent…). Constantine, however, obviously likes being/playing the “rocker.” His return to it was a huge miscalculation, for I really think it alienated the “average macro” voters (like me) who had come to respect his performance abilities and who were grateful for his having given up the silly “rocker” character. His miscalculation showed that this musical chameleon (and I mean that in the absolute best sense possible!) wasn’t as smart as we had thought/hoped. This, then, drove the lack of votes coming from this group.
• Scott’s macro-fanbase, on the other hand, most definitely felt the pressure, and got out the vote — as indicated in this comment from Robin (love ya, big sis! :-D) who lives in the heart of Scott country (Akron-Cleveland). Scott’s “everyman” image also helps him with macro-average (who know the whole “Against All Odds” backstory) and micro (who saw the vignette) folks. Plus, Scott is quite good at infusing his performances with tremendous emotion (though I really do think that he was unable to fully harness the emotion of this week’s song choice — his issues with his dad were just too much for him to control & overcome…). All of this is pretty clearly illustrated by the fact that Scott escaped the bottom 3.

In the end, I think that Constantine’s very versatility, combined with his affinity for the “rocker” persona, kept him from developing the fanbase necessary to weather the storms of the oft fickle & unforgiving AI voting process.

Did Constantine deserve to leave? IMO, no, not this week (though I would’ve given him the heave-ho back in the semifinal phase of the competition…).

Is it a horrific injustice? No, not really. It’s reasonably explained & understood. And it’s nowhere near the top of the list of unjustified AI expulsions — Tamyra (AI-1) & LaToya (AI-3) were both far more egregious & unjustifiable eliminations.

Will it unduly hurt Constantine’s career? No, I don’t think so. I do think he could’ve benefited greatly from having the AI star-making machine behind him, particularly if he accepted & internalized the advice to abandon the “rocker” persona in which he merely looked like a poseur. That said, I think that he’ll have ample opportunity to fashion a successful career, but most likely not one that will transcend to the Clay Aiken/Kelly Clarkson level.

Does this signify the death knell of the AI phenomena? Hardly. This tempest, along with next week’s Primetime expose will heighten interest & exposure. The inevitable backlash will burn out long before we start to see promos for AI-5 next November & December. Come next January, we’ll be more than ready to begin the long march through the tryouts, semifinals, & finals, so that we can see the next winner crowned.

Is this good/bad? It’s both. It’s entertaining (that’s good), it can suck you in & make you care too much (that’s bad). Ultimately, it just is what it is. It’s a product of our current (and always sinful) culture. Fortunately it’s an ultimately superfluous product, one that needs to be taken & evaluated within the context of our individual lives (YIKES! I hate sounding relativistic, but in this context I think I’m on reasonably safe ground… ;-)). But it’s not worth getting upset about — real life is angsty enough…

-ghp