"Age is no barrier" is not a saying that is regularly applied to Eurovision. True, after a bunch of primary school children represented their countries in the mid- to late-'80s the rule was introduced that all of the performers must be at least old enough to avoid allegations of exploitation, but there is no upper limit; there is simply a perception that the contest, especially in its current form, is one for younger singers. The fortunes of more mature artists though have been no more or less mixed than those of their up-and-coming counterparts, with the back-to-back victories of Denmark and Estonia in 2000 and 2001 setting new records for oldest winners and thus proving that the idea of Eurovision being for the 'kids' is something of a misconception. One country that seems to have taken heed is Croatia: not content with providing the contest with its oldest ever singer last year, they have outdone themselves in 2008 and set the bar almost 20 years higher.Like the rosy-cheeked old dear who stole the show for Moldova in 2005, the true star of Romanca is not Croatian crooners Kraljevi Ulice but grand old man 75 Cents. Looking doddery and ever so slightly lost while sounding like everyone's pop about to deliver a "when I was your age" spiel, he is charming and lovable. Though his involvement is really no less exploitative than sticking someone an eighth of his age behind the microphone, it is much more effective and adds a further touch of character to the song that would be conspicuous in its absence were the message to be delivered by someone still wet behind the ears. More to the point, it is not only effective and appropriate to the song, but also very astute in terms of the kinds of gimmicks a Eurovision entry requires these days to win over the televoters.
In that sense it is tempting to lump Romanca in with the various other 'novelty' entries doing the rounds in 2008, but take 75 Cents out of the equation and we have one of the year's most inventively arranged and substantial songs and some of its best lyrics. In purely musical terms it is Croatia's most solid entry for a number of years, well-founded and multi-layered, and composed in a way that reveals something new to you each time you listen to it. Even in the unlikely event that it failed to win the support of the voters, it would have to be a favourite to win the backing of the juries.
Having said that, Romanca is so personable that it should resonate with anyone in the audience over a certain age and still appeal to those below it. I fully expect it to qualify for the final, and once it gets there I am just as convinced that virtually the entire field of tall poppies will be forced to take their hats off to the voice of experience. Croatia has failed to make the top ten every year since 2001, albeit coming close on several occasions, and 2008 is the year in which I feel they will make a triumphant return to it.
10 comments:
Wow for the first time I completely disagree with you. I think this is pants and whilst I could see its neighbours helping it into the final, I can't see it having any widespread appeal.
But do you not see it having any widespread appeal for the very reason that you think it's pants? You have to separate what you want to do well (or not) from what you think will do well. Romanca is not one of my favourite songs of 2008, but I think it has all the qualities of a song that could do well.
Really enjoying your blogg Phutty, keep up the excellent work. I must admit that this song really didn't stand out to me as a natural qualifier, and felt like Acerben that its best chance would be unconditional votes from friendly nations. However, in the 2007 semi they came a poor 16th with just 54 points, with only 20 coming from countries that will be able to vote for them this year. I would also be surprised if the song got the wildcard, firstly because I don't agree that the song is particularly outstanding, and secondly, being cynical, because I would expect juries to be particularly sympathetic to the western countries for whose benefit the the whole system was been manipulated. However, as this entry is so different it is difficult to call it with any confidence. Can you think of any entries in the last 5 years that are remotely like it? None spring to mind for me.
Nope, but then the whole idea of the juries being biased in favour of the west is nonsense. Why should they be?
For the sake of the future of the contest perhaps? The split semi finals was a desperate and contrived move that really needs to be seen to work. If we get a repeat of 2007 with very good songs failing to qualify there is likely to be more trouble. The juries will be well aware of this and I wouldn't be surprised if certain countries are listened to through sympathetic ears. Do we know anything about the juries, who they are, how many, the scoring system they use etc? eg does every jury member give each song a score out of 10?
I don't mean to be contrary, but aren't you contradicting yourself? You seem to be saying that the jury wildcard was introduced to ensure that at least one quality song gets through, and then suggest the juries should be lenient on Western entries i.e. even if they're not up to scratch send them through to the final. Doesn't follow does it?
Besides, you're working on the assumption that the juries can somehow be instructed or controlled. But who by? The EBU claims that by and large there are no problems with the voting, so they're unlikely to favour anyone one way or the other. And it's hardly as if the Western countries hold any sway over the way the East should vote, nor should they.
The thing is, the highest ranked country in the jury list after the televote qualifiers are taken out may well be a Western country, as these are the countries whose chances are most likely to be negatively affected by televoting trends. But what if it's not? What if, say, Moldova only comes 15th in the televote but is the juries' number 5 and thus becomes the wildcard? It's still a quality song, but just happens to come from the East. Why should a Western country whose song the juries thought not as high quality overall be promoted ahead of it?
So much of how countries react to the results this year will be interesting to view in the light of the jury results of the semi-finals.
If the judges were to favour Western countries, only one of them can get the wildcard so its going to the best of those who fail by the public vote, therefore it is highly unlikely to be a song that isn’t up to scratch.
I don’t for one minute suggest there will be any instructions going out, but the jury members will be acutely aware that their return is in response to a crisis for the song contest and a sense of responsibility could easily influence their voting. If for example a jury member is torn between a 7 or 8 for Andorra, I believe they are more likely to fall on the side of 8, than if they had the same dilemma over an Eastern country. Whether this is enough to give a western country a little push up the board and get them above an Eastern country that would otherwise have got the wildcard, who knows.
Eagerly awaiting your analysis on the remaining songs – keep em coming!
They might be overplaying the loveable old codger card with the spluttery old rapper chuntering away for all he's worth, but there's a crisp, affable quality to the rest that suggests it's likely to have a wide appeal. It gets a bit too gimmicky for its own good with the scratch attack at the end but by then it's built up a fair bit of credit. I somehow can't see it getting beyond a mid-table finish in the final though.
Have to admit the song has grown on me a bit, and the feedback from rehearsals has been very positive. Might have got this one wrong.
Very useful material, much thanks for the article.
arrivals | furniture stores Tampa | visiting Washington DC
Post a Comment