I am watching this dance “ reality” show on TV. One of the three judges, a sweet chubby lady, is very moved by a dance performance. In an attempt to make some assessing comments on the performance she is overwhelmed by emotions and unable to come up with words, chocked with surge of uncontrollable feeling in her voice, she is displaying sequence of fast fleeting emotions on her face; like bad terminator in the pool of molten metal in the second Terminator movie fleetingly re-living all previously acquired faces before disappearing in to metal forever- a kind of rewind to complete the cycle and make the end meet with the beginning. In short, a profound emotion capable of being evoked only by kiss of death, she is able to evoke often in response to a mere dance performance. She is, no doubt, a blessed soul. Blessed because, obviously, she has a gift of heightened emotional sensitivity to the impact of a dance performance. Her response to these performances often leaves her crying, and me feeling like a stone hearted barbarian. Clearly, what touches her so deeply in those dances misses me so completely. But, then, I am a calculating type, others with simple heart can definitely feel and appreciate the emotions of a good natured lady. They have to, if she is doing her job well!
The job of making a dance reality show “real” is done by these judges. Technical comments are only fillers, it is through their “act” of being blown away -resulting in melodramatic reaction of crying, hugging, giving standing ovations, bowing, elevating two minutes of dance performance to a level that life work of Birju Maharaj appears to be nothing more than Nagin dance in a Baraat - that viewers are made to forget the choreography done by professionals, the training by professional dance trainers, the dancing background of the participants, and long rehearsals done for a two minute performance (and I am sure final performance is shot with retakes). Essentially, these judges do the trick of pulling the blinders on to viewers’ eyes and guide them in to an emotional elevation that they are otherwise supposed to feel when, let’s say, an underdog wins against extreme odds. They are devices of gullibility through which viewers are made to believe that they have just witnessed something far more spectacular than what viewers’ own judgements tell them. What they have seen in not just a good performance by a well rehearsed, well trained dancer but once in a life time performance by a raw, unknown talent, and should be judged with the magnitude of impossibility of the event that he or she could be spotted and brought to be displayed from remote corner of country (a fact constantly highlighted). These judges give (false!) depth to viewers’ emotional experience by overriding viewers’ own sense of judgement and sense of perception by injecting their own hyperbolic assessment of the performance using (or misusing!) their reputation in the field of their own prominence. Not a crime of course, but then also not exactly equivalent of background laughter in a sitcom. It’s a far insidious attempt at psychologically manipulating the viewer.
For a medium, creative possibilities are always exhausted over a period of time. The differentiation is possible only through nuanced differences, which a large part of population will not be able to pick and appreciate; limiting the commercial possibilities. The medium becomes flooded with more or less similar creative efforts. A commoditisation of creativity starts; which, by the way, by definition is antithesis of creativity. Same is true for TV. So many channels are running more or less similar programs. There is a struggle to get attention and earn TRPs. A situation ripe for marketeers. They enter armed with their tools of lies and manipulation. Sometimes calling it segmentation, sometimes branding. Branding is nothing but increasing the value perception, (mostly falsely) by psychological manipulation of consumer. Something similar is happening here: using reputed persons (celebrities) as judges, a standard dance performance is being elevated to a much higher level through their exaggerated endorsement, to lead viewer into a feeling inflated emotional satisfaction of having seen some thing spectacular. Rather than improving product they are manipulating viewers’ perception of good product, much more directly and on the spot.
It is no surprise that in the success of this type of reality show judges play by far more significant role than participants themselves, who, baring a rare few, are again lost to obscurity after the show is over (Many of them having made their poverty and traumatic background a national spectacle). My guess is that as far as participants are concerned there would be glut there, not to forget we are a country of 1.3 billion. It is good judges who could be in short supply. Judges with a body of known work to give them necessary public reputation and, by implication, assured ability to express themselves in technical terms on camera to public. And, if you have inclination to act, as this lady judge of ours, then you are even more highly valued asset. Though issue of supply of worthy judges gets diluted a bit for It is also not necessary to be expert in the exact same field, having the credibility based on publicly known body of work is good enough ( How else a very mediocre director can be a judge on a singing reality show!).
The personality of judges based on their perceived intellect (here SRK will be rated higher than Salmaan!) by public will play a role in connecting them with different set of audience. Hence it always makes sense to have a panel of judges to cover different target demographics than just having a single judge (the additional melodrama created by show of confrontation of these judges could be a plus; though it is a rare phenomena as mostly these judges have a pact to promote each other on the show).
On this particular reality dance show all three judges are doing a very professional job. Their sincerity and professionalism is apparent in action taking place in each episode. However, this particular lady judge takes a special delight in melodrama. Apparently, experts have told her that her chubby and kind face is well suited for this. Cancer survival story of another judge is also often repeated. And why not! How many people are able to make even their maladies useful. After all it is bond of sympathy where giver is most vulnerable, why not gain sympathy by any means and use it to influence a potential consumer (remember the times when you have bought a product because part of cost will go to fund a school, or to help the poor). It (judging) is good work, for those who have done something in past and now want to rest on their laurels. After all, it is rarely that you earn for resting on your laurels.
No comments:
Post a Comment