Archive: Eurovision Song Contest

There are a couple of things annoying me about the Eurovision Song Contest at the moment.

The first is Finland’s entry, Lordi. They are absolutely diabolical. During the semi final on BBC Three, Paddy O’Connell said that they were a sort of protest vote against Eurovision. Yes, that’s right: because they have guitars all of a sudden it is “real” music. Dohh. In actual fact, Lordi must be one of the most unoriginal acts in the final — and that’s saying something. Slipknot and Bon Jovi should seriously consider suing. And the concept of a heavy rock band being in Eurovision isn’t even original either — Wig Wam did it last year for Norway!

A lot of the acts seem to be quite desperate to win the ESC this year. Many mention the fact that they are going to win in the song. But none has gone quite as far as the truly diabolical ‘We Are Winners’ by LT United, who are Lithuania’s entry. There are only six words in the entire song: “We are the winners / Of Eurovision”. That line is repeated over and over and over again. It is really nothing more than an elaborate football chant. What is even more astonishing is that it got past the semi final!

As usual with Eurovision, the issue of ‘political’ voting is all over the place. Norm is in favour of reintroducing the jury. But what phone voting not originally introduced as a plan to stop political voting? It obviously hasn’t worked. But the EBU could never remove the phone voting now — they must make too much money out of it.

I’ve never found the theory about political voting all that convincing. Surely cultural issues are more at play. If it was all down to political voting, the same country would end up winning the ESC year after year, but that doesn’t happen. Well, it used to, but it happened in Ireland. And guess who always gives Ireland a high score?…

Update: If you must know, I voted for Latvia’s amazing a capella effort and for Ukraine — for the third year in a row! My friend voted for Lordi, more than one apparently. I ended up rooting for them in the end. Crazy, huh?!

Did you see that programme about the Eurovision Song Contest last night? Quite funny I thought.

It’s interesting to see how the competition has evolved. In the 1950s it was more like an experiment than anything else. “Look at us, we can broadcast all round Europe!” Back then the acts mostly seemed to be singers sitting on a stool in a tuxedo. Terry Wogan didn’t start taking the piss until the 70s or 80s.

And here we sit today in 2006, not exactly sure what the Eurovision Song Contest is for any more, apart from a massive irony-diarrhoea-fest and Terry Wogan’s snide remarks. Although there is a lingering suspicion that some nations, particularly in the East, still take the ESC quite seriously (although we shouldn’t blame them given the huge publicity opportunity their country gets as a result), it is clear that British people at least don’t take it seriously.

You only need to look at the song that the British public chose as our entry to see that, yes indeed, we are thoroughly taking the piss (are we a nation of paedophiles or what?). I think you can lay this at the door of Terry Wogan. It is sad, but when Terry Wogan retires we will find out that he is the only true reason for the ESC in the 21st century, and nobody will watch it at all.

Still, I know I’m going to be watching it this year, and I’ll probably watch the semi-final on BBC Three with Paddy O’Connell as well, if I can remember to catch it.

I am shocked to discover, though, that this year the scoring procedure has been completely ruined. Firstly, Britain’s Ambassador to Eurovision is somebody who surely doesn’t deserve any more television exposure, Fearne Cotton. Secondly, the announcers will only announce their country’s top three songs, and 4th–10th will just appear on the screen! Ridiculous!

No doubt this is supposed to be about shortening the scoring procedure, but don’t they realise that the immense length of the scoring procedure is one of the ESC’s plus-points? I don’t know how the viewers are supposed to digest the seven other scores in that short space of time. Pah.

Holyrood Chronicles:

Terry Wogan in the Sunday Telegraph:

For those of us for whom democracy is taken for granted, the Eurovision Song Contest may seem like a grandiose musical mediocrity. To the people of the Ukraine, it was a hymn to freedom.

This may have been written in jest, but there is here an essential truth. The Song Contest is one of the few ways that the Eastern European nations can proclaim their identity as part of Europe. A message for our politicians?

The Liberal Dissenter:

But the voting system is not entirely to blame. It has to be said that the songs entered by the four big countries were all poor, even by the standards of Eurovision. I get the impression that these countries have given up trying. In Eurovision, one must try even if one wants to do badly – like Moldova…

However, the British have to make up their minds about Eurovision. You can’t expect to win the contest if you treat it as a joke, by fielding a succession of piss-poor unknowns and then inviting Terry Wogan to send the whole thing up…

If we accept that Eurovision is a joke and decide to enjoy it as an irony-fest, righteous indignation is a wholly inappropriate response to the outcome. The fact that the UK performs consistently badly should not be any cause for concern. We should instead be happy to see assorted small Baltic and Balkan countries win the contest – after all, it still matters to them.

Re.engage:

Terry Wogan was cross and as the programme ended he complained several times that the four countries that came last (Germany, France, Spain and the UK) actually contributed most to Eurovision. He’d grumbled his way through the show, moaned about the drumming, made racist comments about the Serbs and asked whether anyone actually knew where Moldova was?

See also Independence and Liberal England.

I watched the Eurovision Song Contest at a friend’s house this year, so for this first time Eurovision was drunken for me. The consensus was that the standard in general was higher. I don’t think the others had seen it for a few years though, so I don’t think they were expecting all the big drums and the quasi-Asian / indiginous sound that Eurovision is becoming used to these days.

I thought the standard was higher than average, but there wasn’t a stand-out winner for me. In the end, through gritted teeth, I voted for Ukraine for the second year running because their song wasn’t bad and it had a meaning aswell. Everybody was surprised at the number of rocky numbers. In fact, my friend was so impressed with the standard that he ended up voting for three countries — Norway, Moldova and Germany!

Ruslana popped up during the show several times. I was disappointed to discover that most of her other songs are shite, and she didn’t perform Wild Dances at all. Bah! It is rare for a Eurovision song to be genuinely great; Wild Dances was one of them.

I had Norway down to win, and I was surprised they didn’t do better. At first the voting was all over the place — there must have been about seven different ‘winning’ songs. In the end it was Greece who won by a million miles though, with a standard Eurovision-pish song that I can’t even remember now.

Both me and my friend were in agreement that Terry Wogan is now well past his sell-by date. You can write his script. Insightful comments such as, “That chinky doesn’t look very Ukrainian to me,” and, “Look at that Cyrpus gave Greece twelve points” really don’t add anything to the Eurovision Song Contest any more. And why does he always have to relate everything to Riverdance? Time to punt Wogan off to Radio 2 where 50-year-olds can sit and listen to him for ever more, and leave the rest of us alone. Give Paddy O’Connell — who did a fine job commentating on the semi-final on BBC Three — a chance.

Of course, Wogan made his usual tired comments about “political voting.” Undoubtedly it exists. But Wogan makes it seem like the whole thing is a big eastern European fix. If Russia gives Ukraine two points it’s political voting; when Ireland and Malta give the UK three quarters of its full points haul it’s because the Irish and Maltese have good tastes in music! And if political voting plays such a big part, how come the same country doesn’t win every year?

Infact, if you want a political slant on the Eurovision Song Contest, notice that the bottom four were the big four contributors to the EBU: the UK, France, Germany and Spain! I don’t see what Germany and Spain did to do so badly. For a while, though, I thought that the UK and France would have something in common for once and share nul points status. Of course, Ireland and Malta were there to save the day for the UK; France scrounged a few points off Monaco. None of the big four will get relegated of course, because they contribute so much to the EBU. If you want to look even further in to it, Italy, Austria and Eurovision overachievers Ireland didn’t even get past the semi-final.

Of course the United Kingdom deserved to do as badly as it did. Our song was a bland song, trying to jump on the Brit-Asian bandwaggon; a bandwaggon which lost its wheels two years ago now. It was performed by Ms Blandness McBland of Blandshire with a *ahem* sore throat. Maybe this should be a wake-up call — not just for the UK, but for all of the big four who did badly.

It probably won’t be a wake-up call though. To the UK, Eurovision is a bit of kitsch, some light-hearted fun. Why not enter a cheesy song sung by a bland singer — a tactic the UK has followed for at least the past five years? France seem to be just about the only country left not singing in English.

But maybe it’s greater than the choice of song. I don’t see what was so bad with Spain and Germany’s entires. Infact, I thought they were quite good and didn’t deserved to be lumped in with the dire British and French entries. Perhaps this is political. Is the centre of Europe moving away from the traditional centre, and across to the east? Sometimes it’s difficult for the big countries in Europe to remember that they are only a part of Europe. Is there a genuine divide between ‘old Europe’ and ‘new Europe’?

Of course, I’m probably looking too much into it. To us, Eurovision is still a bit of fun. But that’s the problem. For eastern Europe, winning the Eurovision Song Contest is probably a genuinely proud achievement for a country. I mean, could you imagine Tony Blair sharing the stage with Javine in the same way that Viktor Yuschenko did with Ruslana?

I love the Eurovision Song Contest, because it is just so weird. Like a different universe. Would anybody ever listen to any of those songs in their spare time? No. As such, none of the songs that I almost liked (Austria, Iceland… and Ireland‘s song was okay aswell) got through to the final. (This was unlike last year, when my favourite song — Wild Dances, which was actually really good — actually won! Go Ruslana!)

Austria’s performance, despite the song being quite good in my opinion, was just the height of oddness. A mixture of yodelling, presumably traditional Austrian instruments, trumpets badly mimed on by people who look like they’ve never seen a trumpet before, and tracksuits. And why is the song partly sung in Spanish?

That was the first song, and the second song — I can’t remember which country it was — was quite good aswell. And then Portugal came on, and it was a complete disaster. You couldn’t hear the singers properly, and when you could it sounded just awful. They actually sounded unsure, almost as though they were trying to improvise. I never quite managed to like any other songs after that.

The Irish song was one of the catchiest, and as such a bit cheesy Eurovisiony. And the 17-year-old boy who was singing it looked like he would have been more at home reading Terry Pratchet’s latest novel than singing pop music to the whole Europe and beyond.

Such a weird competition. But that’s why it’s such great viewing.

I just hope that awful Norwegian entry doesn’t win.