This article forms part of the OnEurope archive and was originally published on oneurope.co.uk. It has been permanently migrated to oneurope.net, the official home of OnEurope.
In a first for OnEurope, Monty’s seminal piece about Polish Turd Polishing has not gone down well in some quarters.
As a balanced, if slightly unhinged, website, we accepted a request for a right of reply from a real person who might offer some counterweight to Monty’s view.
Step forward John Abrams. His argument is that Poland’s national final should not be judged solely as a snapshot of one performance: it should also be judged for the potential of the song, the artist and the broadcaster’s willingness to improve.
After reading the article about Poland, You can’t Polish a turd, from the erudite Monty Moncrief, I felt I had to respond. I simply disagree.
National finals are very important for Eurovision fans. Firstly, they want each country to enter a competitive song and create a strong contest. Secondly, fans start ‘rooting’ for songs when they hear a great one. Instincts and hopes rally around the song and its artist. Long gone are the days when they were neither seen nor heard, like naughty children.
Personally, I didn’t think Margaret’s performance was that bad, and to say that fans “hadn’t done their homework” was, might I add, a bit rude. If you don’t look into the broadcaster’s demographic profile — apparently, its average age is at the higher end of the scale — or consider that only one vote was counted per device, then perhaps you might conclude that the fans had not done their homework. They may have been at fault for not swotting up; they certainly weren’t at fault for not getting behind the song.
More importantly, with a selection like this, it is necessary to look to the future. Is it better to have a great song sung averagely, or an average song sung well? What can be changed? Which is preferable: a finished article that is mediocre, or an unfinished one with prospects?
The real problem is the attitude of certain broadcasters, listlessly plodding along without a strategy. When the broadcaster shows no sense of determination, fans are cast adrift. They focus on the here and now, treating the national final like a court of law and dryly weighing up the evidence: “Is there any corroborating evidence, m’lud?” Yawn.
Too many of these finals seem to be about making a great big soup: “just stick it all in”, without regard to recipe, refinement or the benefit of past experience. If they felt Margaret’s singing was not up to scratch, then they should have sacrificed either the song or the artist. It is about taking control and giving a damn.
The contest is not akin to sending someone to jail. National finals should not be judged only by what is seen and heard in front of us. They are also about the future and its possibilities. Young people took to Margaret because they saw potential in both her and the song. If the performance did not change at the competition, at least there was a great song. Onwards and upwards! I cannot see any groundbreaking change for the Poles with Michal.
The petition was not just about Margaret. It was also a call to arms for the Poles to step up to the plate and take the contest seriously. It was a cry for the future. TVP should embrace this spirit and make amends for 2017. Or am I crediting them with more imagination than they deserve?
