American Idol Top 36, Week 2

It's storming hard here, with rain pelting the windows. Here's hoping the basement doesn't flood.

On to silly things: Wasn't that just an awful AI last night? Geesh, you'd think with an extra day to prepare because of the President's speech, this week would have been one of the best. Instead I found myself fast forwarding through the latter half of many songs.

(Note how even in his scheduling Obama's considerate to others. To be in a position of power like that and still think of what's best for the AI contestants . . . why, it's enough to make Chris Matthews' leg tingle. :)

On to the contestants.



I liked Jasmine in earlier rounds, but she was off tonight. It was a sign of things to come.



Wow, Matt G. sucked. I had such high hopes for him and he remains a sentimental favorite in the Slapinions household, but it was painful, just painful. On the radio this morning a DJ and some callers picked him to move on, but they're on crack. Based on this performance, he goes home.



I thought her much bally-hooed legs were allright, but they seemed a little hairy didn't they? Personally, her lips were hotter . . but I digress. The judges were vicious, and good for them. She sucked. Bye bye.

Then came Nick Mitchell aka Norman Gentle



I laughed my ass off the whole way through and hands down he's the most entertaining artist of the evening. Is he the next American Idol? No. But enough from the judges about 'better showcases' for his talent - he can sing (certainly equal to the lame oil rigger chosen last week) and he keeps the audience happy. That alone might warrant a spot in the top 12.

Allison Iraheta rocked the house.



She's under 18 and so I would usually spare her the following, but I think her talent gives her a solid shot at the gold and so the gloves are off: great great voice, solid perfromance, but no personality to speak of and not terribly attractive (in a profession where looks matter a lot.) I hope voters overlook that and vote her through. Easily the best female of the night.

Kris Allen took a Michael Jackson song and held his own and then some.



I think he had the best male performance of the night - bring on the hate mail - but he'll lose out in large part because the cameras avoided him until this week. As I've said before, it's not an even playing field; some contenstants have to overcome the show's format from day one. He's got a good voice, he's good looking . . and unortunately he's gone.



Ah, Megan. The judges loved her. I found her voice inconsistent and no great shakes, her onstage actions awkward, and the wardrobe odd. On the other hand I found her strangely attractive - a pretty, innocent face coupled with a full sleeve of tats - and while it didn't entice me to dial the phone I'm sure she has a fan club of young males salivating and callling non-stop.



Matt was boring. I like the guy, blah blah, but he looked like me dancing up there and that alone should be a reason to pack his bags. A dull performance.



Jesse did allright, but was so calm and confident afterwards with the judges that it slipped from 'refreshing' to 'egotistical'. I guess she's the younger sister of a Grammy Award winner, which would explain it. It was good, but not great. She's going home.



Kai did fine but looked haggard and just seemed far too old for his years. A nice moment to tell the grandkids about, but he won't be moving on.



Mishavonna Henson did much better, in my opinion, than anyone is giving her credit for. But I've also heard her looks dismissed, which to me seems odd as she resembles the Mom from Gilmore girls. Given other people's reacion to her and her song, I say she's a goner.

And then there was Adam Lambert.



I am not a fan of this kid. I know, that makes me the odd man out in America, but I think he is too theatrical, I don't think his voice is stellar (although quite good) and his appearance just IRKS ME. Skinny '80's jeans, a lame Twilight haircut, and visible acne scars covered by makeup just don't scream 'sex god'. Maybe I'm getting too old to know or care, but I'm hoping his momentum eventually runs dry.

* * * *

So who do I think moves on? Adam for the 'boys', Allison for the 'girls'. The third slot should go to someone like Kris, Mishavonna, or Jesse, but I wouldn't cut out Nick Mitchell from the mix.

Who'd I vote for? Kris and Nick, knowing they were probably wasted votes.

* * * *

Some AI snark:

1. Notice the dark vertical line beneath Simon's right eye? Poor makeup and poor lighting - again.

2. What's with all this 'you're a good singer' commentary from the judges? As Lisa said to the screen "No shi*, really? I'm in the top 36 out of the 100,000 you had to chose from and you're telling me I can sing? Shouldn't that have been determined, uh, a long time ago?"

3. Paula is high. This is not an insult. It is a fact. It is either painkillers or pure booze, but she is not right.

4. Did you catch the harsh anti-Kara words from Paula in OK magazine? Oh, they weren't directed at her as a person, but rather in the form of a complaint that four judges 'slowed' down the show. Note to Paula: Your rambling diaglouges slow the show down, not the lucid lady sitting next to you.

Ash Wednesday

Happy (?) Ash Wednesday to you all. On this holy day, I give you the act of a Good Samaritan:

After dance class last night Lisa went out shopping with my sister.

Around midnight (they'd set out at 10PM) Lisa phoned to say she had a flat tire and was stuck in the parking lot of a 24 hour grocery store. Luckily this was in a good neighborhood and relatively close to home.

Unfortunately, the Escort is still on ice and I was stuck at the house. Even if it was not, there was no safe means of waking up the kids and loading them all into the two-door Ford. Not with only me at the wheel, and certainly not with Lisa and my sister added in. She was on her own, and what's worse our jack had broke back on Inauguration Day.

Leave the van, I said, and I'll go and pick it up in the morning.

Now as it happens there was a fire truck in the lot, dealing with a drunk. My sister approached them and asked for help. They scoffed and literally shut the engine door in her face.

I know they're not required to help, and in fact probably prohibited from doing so, but a little tact would have been nice.

So it looked like they were going to have to hike it home. And then a stock boy approached and asked if they needed help. He went to his car and got his jack and tire iron and took off the tire, ruining his khaki's in the process. Then the jack slipped, crashing down on his jack and ruining it. Luckily no one was hurt.

This should have been the end of it. Most people, including possibly myself, would have said 'that's enough', apologized, and moved on.

Instead he got a jack from a friends car and finished the job. When they thanked him, he said it was no problem and joked that it was his good deed for Lent.

Once again, there are good people in this world. Sometimes you don't even need to seek them out - they find you.

Enjoy the Lenten season and all the fish fry's that come with it.

Drood - by Dan Simmons

I think I finally have validation (a rationale?) for my practice of recording every book I read.

When a list like mine is put on the printed page its easy to trace the thought processes of the reader. In the last month I read Matthew Pearl's The Dante Club. That led, inevitably, to explorations of both The Inferno and mid 19th century American poetry. From there I moved on to a brief survey of Poe (he is very briefly mentioned in The Dante Club) which led me back to Pearl and his The Poe Shadow. Likewise, my reading of Drood led directly to picking up a copy of Wilikie Collins' The Moonstone.

I like being able to look back and deduce what led me to move from one work to another. Knocking them out of order, as I've done this year (my reviews are scheduled to run willy-nilly throughout the year) robs me - and the many future historians who will study me - of the opportunity to see that organic thought process in action.

I'm not going to go back and reschedule many of the reviews I have set to run throughout 2009, but from now on I think I'm going to stick to a general 'print them as I read them' plan. :)

* * * *

I was very gung-ho for Dan Simmons' Drood, even going so far as to seek out, in vain, an advance reader's copy.

Drood tells the story of the last five years of Charles Dickens life, as told by his friend, the best-selling novelist Wilkie Collins. In June of 1865 Dickens was involved in a horrendous railroad accident when his train failed to stop for a bridge that was under construction. Of the passenger cars, only Dicken's failed to crash to the riverbed below, and even his literally balanced on the edge of the precipice.

In many ways he was never the same man. To historians, the shock and trauma of the event are easy sources of blame.

To Dan Simmons, it would have more to do with the sudden appearance of Drood, a ghastly apparition that contacts Dickens at the crash site and forever after drags the author into a seedy and violent battle with the black arts.

Drood - note the name later used in Dickens' unfinished final novel - is allegedly the king of London's crime world. He was once, we are told, the half Egyptian son of an English Lord, abandoned and taught the ways of the Pharaoh's gods. When he was inconveniently carved to pieces and murdered many decades ago he returned (sans eyelids, nose, etc) to lay claim for the murder of more than 300 people in London.

And now he seems to have added Dickens as an ally and with each day Collins grows increasingly surer of one thing: to save himself and London, he must murder the great Charles Dickens.

I found the novel engrossing, the characters well developed and believable, and the attention to historical detail impressive (although I'm the first to admit he could have lied about every date - and perhaps he did - and I wouldn't know the difference).

Unfortunately, all those historical details added up to 704 pages of reading, easily two or three hundred more than the story required. The plot, borrowing something from Dickens himself, seems to plod along without any real urgency. I fear on this point Simmons was trapped by his bookending dates; the railway accident on one hand and the author's death on the other. The action had to be made to fit within that time frame, a fact which seems to have required a fair bit of text in which nothing happens.

Simmons also plays hard and fast with the moral fiber of the characters, in particular the narrator Wilkie Collins. I'm afraid my own religious views might cloud this point, but I am not a fan of taking a historical figure and, simply for the sake of a story, turning him into a wife beater, a pedophile, an arsonist, etc. None of the above apply to the real or imagined Collins, but there are substantial breaks from known behavior that eat away at me . . .

Anyway. On length alone I cannot recommend this book 100%. Coupled with the other flaws I've listed, I'd say give it a go only if you are a fan of Dickens, Collins, or a serious aficionado of historical fiction set in the Victorian era.

Lost: '316' and some Oscar notes

I hope to put up an AI post before the Wednesday results show. I'd also like to do a post on a new reality show I've taken a shine to, but that might have to wait. In the meantime the standard Lost post . . well, the following will have to do:

I was pretty disappointed with episode '316', which brought the six back to the island. Cue a long and revoltingly juvenile explanation about the means of how to return: the Losties must play dress up and recreate as best as possible the circumstances and actions of the original flight. They must do this on board another jet which, presumably, will meet a predicted demise and carry the group back to the island.

Ok, what hooey. It reeks of 'Dork', and seems quite illogical. This isn't a one-time means of transport, this is the recommended way and means of travel to the island. You're telling me Ben did this each and every time he left the island? Please. And don't start waving the 'time jump' garbage at me. According to the same speech the island has always been moving around. So why the masqurade?

The only real mystery of the episode was the sudden and unexpected enlistment of many of the Oceanic Six. What spurred their sudden change of heart? Where is Aaron? What's with the guitar?

(my guess is that Aaron is now back with Ghost Claire, Charlie convinced Hurley, and Ben had Sayid arrested . . . but I still don't get why he's on his way to Guam)

What happened to the plane? The episode makes you think/hope that the plane survives and that the Six are merely 'picked' off the flight and tossed into the jungle. I'm not sure. That 'fake' flight 815 wreck had to come from somewhere, and it'd be a juicy if tragic twist to have the pilot (who's name escapes me) wind up as the very corpse that inspired him to seek the truth about the crash of 815.

A few loose ends:

1. Obviously the Jack/Kate/Hurley made the jump, but wound up far earlier in the islands time stream than expected, early enough to encounter the Dharma Initiative (and Jin). How will that play out? Are Ben/Sayid/Sun some other 'time' on the island?

2. I could care less if John blames Jack and killed himself over it (which I don't buy). Blah blah. I wouldn't have believed you either, ya kook.

3. Yeah, I get it. '316' is the name of the episode, the flight involved, and of course the famous biblical verse from the Book of John. Tie that in to the vein of faith/doubt that runs through it - and the outright reference to Thomas by Ben - and voila, you have the theme of the day. Leading us to the next point . .

4. Even if he isn't religious, or formally schooled in the Christian faith, Jack is a literate and educated man. Is it likely he wouldn't know of the story of Doubting Thomas, even if only from the cultural shorthand the incident inspires? There should have been a third, more naive person in the scene to shout out those nods to the obvious, not Jack.

* * * * *

Oscar notes:

1. What a bore. Pretentious and boring from start to finish, it was livened only by Heath Ledger's win (kudos) and Ben Stiller's hit (and miss) J. Phoenix imitation.

2. What an awful idea to have former winners announce the nominees! Could the Oscars work harder to present Hollywood as an obnoxious industry, populated with people with an exaggerated sense of self worth?

3. Not having seen the nominated films, I'm still comfortable making this prediction: twenty years from now - ten years from now - none of the 'big' films will be remembered or widely viewed. Instead, Wall-E and The Dark Knight will fill that bill.

4. All complaining aside, I'd rather win an Oscar than a Pulitzer any day.

14 years and counting

Yesterday was the 14th anniversary of the day Lisa and I met, an event documented in detail last year.

Lisa worked most of the day, but ~ 9 P.M. we went out for a quick bite to eat, leaving my sister to watch the (sleeping) kids. Not the grandest of celebrations, but at least it was something.

One honest and revealing anecdote: While Lisa was at work I watched the kids use the air popper to make a bowl of popcorn. Even Lump was hovering around, trying to join the festivites and fit in with her older siblings.

I loooked at them with fondness and thought "This is why we're together. If I'd never met Lisa none of these little people would be around."

A few hours later, once they'd worn down my nerves, I looked at the group of them again. The same words ran through my head, this time with an entirely different meaning and emphasis:

"Da--- it, If I'd never met Lisa none of these little people would be around."

:)

Here's the full article

I confess I'm a bit proud of my Journal-Sentinel column from a few days ago. Not the writing, since I have yet to read it start to finish in published form (Why? Because a part of me is afraid it sucks and was published out of pity. I'm a nutjob.)

Instead it's the reaction that brings a smile to my face. I've received nine emails that run the gamut of the profession: teachers, parents, a high school principal, and even a PHD from a Virginia based educational think-tank.

All the letters were positive and most were chock full of 'additional reading' suggestions, links to educational theories and articles, and full out discussions of possible solutions. If I had a mind to I could consume the better part of a week just skimming the information they provided, and maybe I better; two of the letters suggested I do a follow-up piece down the road.

I did take the Journal to task for chopping out one line critical of the School Board member in the piece. His comments about the citizens of my neighborhood are inflammatory and deserve a column-long rebuttal of their own. I also included some suggestions for improving the Community Columnist process.

In response I got a 572 word letter from the editor (yes I counted the words, which finish at 72 more than my own article). In it she explained the decision about the edit was not based on politics but on length, and went on to discuss a whole lot more. The highlight of the letter is her belief that the one year term for the job will be expanded to somewhere between a 14 to 16 month commitment and that the frequency of publication will increase.

Which is good news, no?

For posterity, here's the text of the column:

What's the problem at MPS?
By Daniel Slap----

Posted: Feb. 18, 2009

Recently, I heard a radio ad promoting the safety features on Milwaukee County buses. There are, said the commercial, four camera on each bus, a silent alarm, GPS tracking and rewards for information on anyone who assaults a passenger or driver.

It was an impressive, if frightening, list. While it's probably overkill, if it prevents crime, I doubt anyone will complain. What stuck with me, however, was the general idea that drove the message: that the world is harsher, people are more wicked than ever and Milwaukee has changed.

I don't necessarily agree. Like it or not, the world is what it's always been, if not marginally better, and if people were so grand in the good ol' days, our history books wouldn't have to discuss names like Josef Stalin and Jack the Ripper.

Either way, here's what I find odd. We're very quick to blame the city's status quo for problems such as assaults on buses and the crime rate in general, but we're unwilling to even consider it when it comes to our schools. No, for Milwaukee Public Schools, it's either the buildings, the educators, the superintendent, the curriculum, federal testing requirements or the kitchen sink - you name it.

I am not a liberal, but I'm starting to think that decades of tinkering with MPS just may be a smokescreen to ignore the real problems with the system: that in the end, our schools do nothing more than reflect the nature of the city itself.

We've spent generations pretending that isn't the case. I graduated from Pulaski High School just in time to have Howard Fuller present me my diploma. You remember Fuller, right? He was the man who was going to reinvigorate the "troubled" school system and bring hope to Milwaukee.

I walked across that stage in 1992. Exactly what has changed since then? Sure, it's not all bad. Some schools have high attendance, great parental participation and students who perform well.

But that just bolsters my point. If MPS as an entity was the problem, wouldn't all schools fail? Wouldn't all students have to exert an incredible amount of self-determination and willpower just to succeed academically?

Some people, such as School Board member Terry Falk, continue to believe that fiddling is best. Falk's latest theoretical fix? Potentially scrapping K-8 schools - themselves a recent idea - in favor of grades 6-12 facilities.

Enough already. The fault lines seem clear. MPS is operating in a city with dire problems, where some geographic areas continue to prosper while others operate in a climate of poverty and crime. School performance appears often to follow those socioeconomic trends.

For the record, I'm not excusing the poor performance of students who should realize that education is a path to greater prosperity. And I don't have any bright solutions either. Except one: If we're going to keep the questionable practice of throwing money at the problem, quit wasting it on the wrong problem.

Daniel Slap--- is a Milwaukee native and the father of four

Button, Button: Uncanny Stories by Richard Matheson

*Read in 2008*

Richard Matheson might just be the greatest writer you've never heard of. The author of I am Legend, Stir of Echoes, What Dreams May Come, The Incredible Shrinking Man, Hell House (a 2007 read of mine), numerous Twilight Zone episodes, etc, you'd think he'd be a household name. Instead, when he's spoken of at all it's often in relation to Stephen King, a man who names Matheson as one of his greatest inspirations.

Button, Button is a collection of pre-1970 stories by Matheson, headlined by the wonderful title piece. It's the tale of a woman who is offered $50,000 for each time she'd press a button, knowing that each time she pressed it a stranger would die. There's goofiness here too, such as 'The Creeping Terror', Matheson's take on the spreading influence of California, and Twilight Zone worthy pieces like 'No Such Thing as a Vampire', and the dated 'The Jazz Machine'.

There are great stories in the book and a small percentage of clunkers, but overall a fine collection and a solid introduction to the work of a master.

Recommended.

A link to my column

Here's a link to the column I wrote for the Journal-Sentinel.

I'm not being coy when I say that I haven't read the piece today, nor do I remember the contents word for word. The link came via an email from a family member, but I was unable to open JS Online in my browser and review it. I know it's the Milwaukee Public Schools article that was 'under consideration' with the J/S. [the other two accepted pieces are 'evergreens' that can be published throughout the year]

Anyhow, it's off to work to pick up a few Journals they saved for me and take a gander at my picture.

American Idol - Top 36 - Group 1

Ladies and gentelmen, we have our first confirmed Blogger screw-up! Last night I began an elaborate and beautiful American Idol post, complete with pictures every which way, stunning commentary, etc; you know, the typical Slapinions panache.

At 12:53 AM I hit 'publish post' and it did not. Instead it saved the post, but in doing so ignored all the 'autosaves' and reverted back to a version from 12:09.

Now in a way that's cool, because it's the title of a Joe Mac album (NKOTB holla!)** but I lost an hour of work, gave up, and went to bed.

Hmm. I guess Blogger learned a thing or two from AOL.


** actually, the album might be 11:09, the memory is fuzzy now. We'll stick with 12:09 or else lose the line, ya know?

* * * * * *

First up on the show was Jackie Little.

I know Jackie's built up a nice little fan base, but I don't get it. Her voice is fine but hardly earth shattering and what her fans generously describe as 'originality' is in truth mere flakiness. Her performance was captivating. It's a shame her vocals weren't.



Next up was Ricky Braddy, and here I must launch a strong objection to the show's format. Of course it's impossible for AI to showcase each and every one of the 36 contestants. But the lack of media exposure is a clear and substantial barrier to success. No matter how good someone is - and I'm not necessarily putting Braddy in that category - they will have to overcome the well established voting base the singers with 'face time' have already built.



Braddy did great and was one of only four performers I placed a '+' next to in my notes from the show. Sadly, I don't think he'll move on.

Then came Alexis Grace.



I underestimated this woman.

[note: I'm sorry, I can't STAND AI's insistence on calling the contestants 'boys and girls'. Some of them are near thirty years old, and many have children. They are most definitely not 'girls and boys'.]

I think I genuinely mistook her for the dreadlocked orphan that was dropped during Hollywood week, and for that I'm sorry. Her voice ROCKED. Powerful, controlled, mature, and vibrant. Were talent alone the indicator of sucess, she should easily advance.

Fourth up was the good looking and talented Brent Keith.



Most of the time when the judges use the term 'wrong song choice' it's simply a euphemism for 'your voice sucked', as we'll see later in the show. But this time it was spot on. What an awful and limiting song and it cost him dearly. Judging by the tears he was fighting back, I think he agrees.

Then it was time for Stevie Wright.



Stevie is 17 and the nerves got the better of her. I'll spare her any serious critique because of her age, but . . it was not good.

Anoop Desai is a puzzle.



You could easily picture listening to his voice on the radio, but he lacks the sex appeal and demeanor of a star. For Pete's sake, the guys got bigger eyebrows than me. On talent alone he should be a threat to move on, but I don't know if he'll get the votes to pull it off.

Casey Carlson was up next.



Let's be blunt: quite possibly the WORST non-audition performance in AI history. From the winks, the dorky dancing, the revolting vocals, to the song choice, it was BAD. If anyone other than friends and family voted for her I'd be shocked.

Michael Sarver is someone I was wishing well. He's got a great story and seems genuine.



With that said, I don't think he did all that well. I'd say he's cut now, but will be brought back for the wildcard show.

Ann Marie Boskovich is a beautiful and sexy woman with not a lot of confidence.



I think her vocals were good enough to have let her survive a standard 'final twelve' show, but with the restrictions imposed on this portion of AI she won't make the grade. In many ways it's a shame.

Stephen Fowler ticks me off.



So much talent, so many opportunities, and time and again he finds a way to fail. Ugh.

Now, a word about AI: bullsh** the singing order is random. You mean to tell me the two most popular singers just *happened* to close out the show?

Tatiana Del Toro looked sexy if subdued, and going into it I verbally denounced her attempt to tackle an iconic song.



I was wrong. I think the judges were a tad immature in their commentary and overlooked a grand vocal performance for this stage in the game. If I have any say, Tatiana stays.

Milwaukee's own Danny Gokey finished the show last night.



As is par 95% of the time, I second Simon. I thought it was a great performance but not a masterpiece and feel three of the judges oversold the vocals. I'm not buying the whole package . . .yet.

* * * * *

In the end we voted for Danny, Tatiana, Alexis, and Ricky Braddy. I expect Danny and Alexis to take the top two slots and Tatiana to take the third.

* * * * *

I bet heads were rolling after the show. Ricky Braddy's microphone wasn't working during Ryan's interview, the wrong video was cued for Brent, after Stephen's song the TV cut to shots of a floor, and on no less than three occasions Simon outed the band's arrangements and even their (keyboard) playing.

Yikes.

The wonders of live TV, eh?

Good News

As I sit here writing this and looking out my window at ten to one in the afternoon there is not a single flake of snow outside. Not one.

This is one of two reasons I've paid no attention to weather forecasts for a decade now. One, I can't do anything about it if nine inches of snow had decided to fall. Two, they're quacks. Panic, hysteria, paranoia and melodrama live and breathe inside the heart of every meteorologist. Why, if they were elected to office I'd wager they could ratchet up the fear so effectively that you'd actually thank them for passing a 700 billion dollar pork, er, stimilus bill. :)

Anyhow, more good news:

The Journal-Sentinel editor wrote me today to say that a piece I did on Milwaukee Public Schools will be running in tomorrows edition. I'll certainly post a link to it here, but if you live in Wisconsin or upper Illinois, kindly pick up a copy, raise their circulation, and inspire them to hire me on.