AI:5 - Hollywood Days 1 & 2
Hollywood week, days 1 & 2 — the thinning of the herd — where we’re given the whirlwind tour of watching 175 get pared down to 99 [Note: the math doesn't quite work out, as at one point they stated that 66 folks were eliminated, and 175-66=109 
but I guess we'll let that slide... :neutral:]
For me, the fun of Hollywood week is trying to discern patterns. Who do the producers think the favorites are/could/should be? Who from among the featured open auditioners are/aren’t shown? And perhaps most interestingly, Who did they hide from us during the open auditions? (ala Bo)
Last night only yielded one major certainty, IMO — Paris Bennett is a stone-cold-lead-pipe-LOCK to make it to the finals. More than anyone else this season (and perhaps more than in any previous season at this stage of the competition!) it really looks like this is her title to lose. I’ve had favorites in past seasons, but never do I recall anyone looking this strong this early. She’s scary good.
And that’s even taking into consideration that there are some other folks looking quite strong, including Lisa Tucker, Ace Young, Mandisa Hundley, Chris Daughtry, and the first of our “unknowns” Patrick Hall.
An always interesting category is that inhabited by the kids who stood very tall in the open auditions, but who started slowly in Hollywood. This season, the group includes: Kellie Pickler & Katherine McPhee in the “Victim of Nerves” category, and Megan Zeiger in the “Oh-NO!-I-Lost-My-Voice” category. (but it was rather funny to see all the wannabes who tried to play the sick-card after the judges gave Megan a pass… :lol:)
I was slightly surprised that Cowboy Garret Johnson & underdog Kevin Covais got through, it was still great to see, as they both seem like nice guys. It was also a little surprising, but still very positive, to see the gray-haired Joe Cocker-esqe Taylor Hicks get through.
For me, those falling into the “conspicuous-by-their-absence” category were: Brooke & Leah Barret Smith, and Rebecca O’Donahue.
I’m not going to bother discussing the Brittenum twins, mainly because it’s already known that they got their sorry butts “uninvited” from the competition.
I derived a possibly sinful amount of pleasure from watching the twin-towers of smarmy, self-loving, manhood — Ronnie Norman & Steven David — crash & burn on the altars of their own hubris. 
That’s about it for me. It was a nice hour, with reasonable amounts of angst, nerves, and talent.
Next up: Groups! This is always fun to watch, as egos will undoubtedly collide, tempers will flare, and nerves will fray to the breaking point!
-ghp
AI:5 - The Boston Auditions
Well. Thank God the open/cattle-call auditions are over.
Boston wasn’t as good as I had hoped it might be. I don’t know why I had that hope, but I did — perhaps it was because I really wanted the open auditions to end on a high note, as a way to head into the Hollywood “hell week” phase feeling good. I should’ve known better… 
Boston gave us an even crankier Simon (justifiably so, IMO, because of what we saw and not because of the whole British thing — sometimes FOX just makes me feel embarrassed for them because of how they try to manufacture “good” TV…), Randy & Paula putting some marginal candidates through, the usual “car wreck” (& possibly clinically-delusional) kids, along with a couple of good stories.
The “good”: Ayla Brown — perhaps a bit too “TV ready” and/or slickly packaged for my tastes, but still a pretty girl with a decent voice. And I like the potential for tension between her athletic & artistic ambitions. Rebecca O’Donahue — One half of quite possibly the best looking twins ever to grace the AI stage, and she comes with the ready made fan-base building story of her twin’s vocal cord issues. She clearly oversang the song, and I’m shocked Simon didn’t put her through (as he usually likes the easily commercial types, even if/when they have marginal voices, at this stage of the competition), but I think she was worth giving a second chance. Tatiana Ward — Will not get much farther, barring the emergence of any heretofore unseen vocal talent; however, she has a great backstory, what with wanting to prove things to her maternal grandmother. Kevin Covais — A total anti-type/underdog, but with a nice voice (not great, but well… nice) and a great attitude. Not a chance in Hollywood, mind you, but you like to see some good guys get rewarded once in a while.
The “bad”: Holly Corrente — I would’ve liked to have seen her get through, as I liked her voice, her personality, and her story. Thus, it’s bad that she didn’t get through. “Cher-boy” — Aside from the obvious lack of singing talent, I just didn’t like his attitude. He also gets inclusion in the “bad” because his combativeness goaded Simon into greater levels of boorishness.
The “car-wreck”: the Clay-poster — Ahh, our token, obligatory, horror show auditioner. This time with a hook of having a passing similarity looks-wise with Clay Aiken. A farce. Unpleasant. Insulting to Clay. Horrible. A pox on the producers for stooping to this level — not just this one time, but so repeatedly during this initial auditioning phase of the show.
Again, thank God the open auditions are over. 175 kids are headed to Hollywood for “hell week”, and we get to start watching the festivities tonight.
I look forward to the slow upwards turn in quality, both in music and in storytelling, that will begin tonight. It looks like there will be nice amounts of angst & conflict — which I don’t mind nearly as much in Hollywood (& beyond) because it’s more a result of passion borne out by actual talent (and not merely delusions of adequacy and/or grandeur).
Now we can start identifying our favorites & becoming invested in the whole process. Sure, it’s silly. But it’s so much darned fun that I refuse to feel guilty! I will care. I will analyze. I will write. I will enjoy!
Rock on.
-ghp
Technorati Tags: american-idol
Missouri is as Missouri was… as Missouri will be
The LCMS is heterodox.
Or, at least as heterodox as a man-made organization can be, ’cause Missouri ain’t Church. It’s a political organization that at one point, long, long ago, did what it was created to do — make it easier for like-minded confessional congregations to do coordinated mission work & train church workers, esp. pastors. Brotherly admonition & loving church discipline was also the hallmark of Missouri back in the day. None of this is all that accurate to say anymore. Missouri has grown to such a size that it merely (like any other bureaucracy) seeks to perpetuate itself and the power of those positions that run it.
Now, part of why I say this is to remind myself of why it’s important to be a confessionalist rather than a synodicalist. I also say this in order to provide a jumping off point for commenting on two passages that I’ve recently come across in the course of my reading. Both passages nicely illustrate that that what we are enduring in Missouri is nothing new, neither in the context of Scriptural teachings, nor in the context of Missouri’s lifespan.
A commentary series that I can recommend with the clearest conscience is The People’s Bible Commentary, originally (and still) published by the WELS’s Northwestern Publishing House, and also now available again from the LCMS’s Concordia Publishing House. Even though it uses the NIV (which I believe is an inferior translation compared to the NKJV, the NASB-95, Beck’s AAT, and even the ESV) it’s still a worthwhile series for it’s solid, orthodox, Lutheran commentary.
I get the first passage from the The People’s Bible Commentary volume on Hosea/Joel/Amos, by Paul E. Eickmann. Commenting on Hosea 5:8-15, which deals with Judah’s unfortunate following of Israel into exile, the author writes:
“When the Lord’s people forget Him, they look for salvation elsewhere. During this period in their history both Judah and Israel frequently turned to Egypt and Assyria for help.” … “Now Judah is turning in the same direction for help against Israel and Syria. Hosea compares his people to a hopelessly sick man looking for a new doctor to heal him. The people’s real sickness is an idolatrous trust in Baal and in various human helpers. Because of their unbelief the Lord is bringing His judgement upon them.” (p. 54)
Now it’s not too difficult to see that this theme has repeated itself many times throughout history. The Church Militant is constantly under siege by the Enemy. We should never be truly surprised by this. But it is disappointingly easy to see that Missouri is quite thoroughly entrenched in the same behavior as Judah. Ablaze!(tm) Open Communion. Politics trumping theology/doctrine. The list goes on & on. Synodical leaders have looked elsewhere for “deliverance” as they get sucked into the latest fads of “relevance,” “church growth” methodologies, and even worldly acclaim & popularity. Yes, these things have been pursued despite all the evidence, historical and Scriptural, that such a course of action is actually the fast track to failure.
The second passage also comes from a book published by NPH — A Tale of Two Synods: Events That Led to the Split between Wisconsin and Missouri. This book, authored by Mark E. Braun, is a wonderful work of History based on the exhaustive use of first person accounts & primary source research. It chronicles the ebb & flow of the relationship between the Wisconsin & Missouri Synods, especially from the beginning of the Synodical Conference in 1872 until Wisconsin broke fellowship with Missouri in 1961. It’s a fascinating read from both historical and Lutheran perspectives. It also shows that there have always been problems in Missouri. It could be argued, however, that the tide really started to turn with the reluctance to exert proper church discipline back in 1945 with the A Statement of the 44 controversy. This tide built & crested in the mid 1970’s “Battle for the Bible” and Seminex walkout. We’ve been living with the results, directly and indirectly, ever since.
These tendencies in Missouri have been noted by those outside of the synod for quite a while. On p. 228-229, Braun relays the following statements by a WELS pastor (Egbert Schaller) on the subject of a church being orthodox, erring, or heterodox:
“Schaller defined an orthodox church body as ‘one which consistently, through official declaration and confession, teaches the Word of God in its truth and purity,’ and one in which its practice ‘is in full accord with that doctrine.’ An erring church body has been ‘overtaken in a fault’ by following corrupt leadership ‘but is taking energetic steps to restore its orthodox character by vigorous discipline.’ A heterodox church ‘persistently, by official pronouncement and resolution, advocates and justifies a corruption or an ambiguous form of any doctrine of God’s Word and tolerates unscriptural practice.”
I think it’s quite clear & plain to see that Missouri, then, is no longer either an orthodox, or even an erring church body. She is very much so a heterodox body. This was noted in Wisconsin. Even in 1953 it was observed that,
“after 15 years of ‘fruitless appeal for correction and the most patient admonition on our part,’ Missouri’s aberrations and offenses had increased, not diminished. It was unrealistic to consider the Missouri Synod an involuntarily erring chruch body. A church body must be considered heterodox when heterodoxy ‘has become its fixed characteristic.’ Though ‘the Lord in that body still has thousands of faithful,’ it ‘does not change the verdict upon the church body as such.’ Schaller then reviewed the past quarter-century of intersynodical history, offering ‘compelling evidence that the Missouri Synod, once an orthodox body, has become a heterodox body.”
Now, lest you think that I’m leaning towards Wisconsin being a viable alternative to Missouri, let me state that such is not the case. From what I’ve read/seen/heard, WELS has their own demons that they’re fighting, particularly in the form of church-growth. Besides, I’m not really sure that I agree with their view of the OHM. In the end, the Wauwatosa theologians make me kind of nervous — I’ll take Franz over August, in the Pieper-brother battle royale. However, I do think that the ELS is a possibility, as they seem to be very solid on paper, in a Brief Statement kind of way.
Nope, Missouri is heterodox, and I don’t think that she can be saved. Nor do I think that it’s really all that big a deal if we don’t/can’t. God’s Church will prevail, even if our synods might not, and in that I take comfort. My hope is that there will always be an easy way for me to identify a faithful church body, so that I can take my family there. If that means that there are many smaller synods (my preferred case, as I think size brings too many problems & temptations, but that’s a post for another day…), great. If it means a more episcopal/hierarchical polity, ok (but I doubt it). Certain things are negotiable. The important things are not. And Missouri has lost the distinction between them.
-ghp
S:12ep01 - Mature Matronly Morons
Ahhhh, the start of another season of Survivor! The twelfth edition of the venerable Grande Dame of realitytv emanates from the same group of islands in Panama that showcased the 7th (Pearl Islands) & 8th (All-Stars) editions. This time things will be brimming over with so many chunks of game-twisty goodness that the producers didn’t even try to hide the first several twists from being talked about before the show started - to wit: Exile Island & the super-charged immunity idol hidden thereon, starting with 4 tribes divided by age & sex (older men, older women, younger men, younger women), and a “schoolyard pick’em” style tribal restructuring into 2 tribes at the end of the 2nd episode.
The Good: I like the major shakeup that Exile Island & the hidden immunity idol is going to cause in terms of game strategy. Suddenly, not being included in tribal interactions for a few days/nights isn’t all that bad a thing, when you can come out of it with an immunity idol that can be used after voting is done! This just puts a whole new spin on things, and I think it’ll make for some very interesting bluffing (as we’ve already seen in action by Misty) & rethinking of how blocs/alliances might go about voting. I also like, for the most part, the cast, as there seems to be an interesting mix of personalities.
The Bad: The three remaining older women are, quite frankly, morons. That these three, who seemingly cannot provide much of anything for themselves (and, indeed, one of which is AFRAID OF FREAKIN’ LEAVES!!! 
:?:), let their voting strategy be dictated by the one who’s afraid of leaves and who has no chance of ever helping them win a challenge (physical or mental)? Well, it’s just too bad that things are getting shaken up by the pick’em restructuring, because I’d really like to see them get oh-so-deservedly knocked off. Well, that’s a touch overstated — I’d like to see Cirie & Melinda get voted off. I kinda like Ruth-Marie thus far, and would give her the benefit of the doubt by chalking up her vote for Tina as being a moment of temporary strategic insanity…
My only other significant observation: How big of a moron do you have to be to not stop smoking well before you leave to embark on the whole Survivor experience? I mean, come on Shane! How can you set yourself up to go through the nicotine DTs during the first few days of your time on the island? Loser.
Right now, my favorites are (in alphabetical order): Dan, Misty, Ruth-Marie, & Terry.
-ghp
-
Analytics & Hosting
