In two weeks' time, the Eurovision Song Contest 2011 takes place. All 43 participating songs have been decided, and the album containing every song is out. So, in a run-up to the competition, on a day when Brits are proudly flying their flag, here are a few thoughts on the United Kingdom in Eurovision as it currently stands.
Living in the UK, I know that I am in the vast VAST minority of those who absolutely adore Eurovision. And I don't mean in an ironic, sneery, let's-all-laugh-at-the-foreigners kind of way. In a genuine, music-loving way. Yes, the kitsch, glitter, cheese, costumes and dodgy choreography aren't (always) to be taken seriously, and I can laugh at it, as much as I can laugh with it. Anyone who's read my American Idol/X Factor blogs can attest to that. If I hated the shows as much as I appear to, I wouldn't watch them.
But I honestly wish that the UK took Eurovision more seriously, for simple, sensible reasons. And it's not because we haven't won for 14 years.
British music has always been at the forefront of the world's music scene, particularly the Western world. America may have taken over, and British acts famously struggle in the States- but in Europe, many British acts are as successful across Europe (and indeed the world) as they are at home. So why don't we do better at Eurovision?
The loudest cry is "politics". I cry back, "bollocks". Yes, there are a few countries that may choose to do so (Greece and Cyprus- GUILTY!), and it would be naive to suggest otherwise. But it's only on a limited scale. Each country gets 10 votes (totalling 58 points), and all the bias in the world can't affect a barrage of decent scores from the countries that voted on the music. There may be 25 countries performing in the final, but all 43 participating countries get to vote, even if eliminated at the semifinals. This makes a total of 2494 points on offer.
Plus, we have to bear in mind that several countries simply share tastes more so than politics, so a jaunty song full of accordions and fiddles will likely go down better in one country than a boy band ballad would, and vice versa in another country. Statistics show that the UK is as guilty of "political" bias, as we nearly always vote for Ireland, Sweden and Greece. But is it out of some sense of political affiliation, or because we simply share a more similar musical taste?
The biggest "political" grumble of late has been that of Eastern Europe vs Western Europe. In particular, over the last decade, a huge number of winners have been from dissolved Eastern European states. Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Croatia and Russia- all newcomers, all neighbours, many used to belong to the same country, all "obviously" voting for each other, right? Well, no. All of those winners were getting high scores from neighbours, but they couldn't have won without a substantial vote from the Western countries as well. Three of the other five winners were Western countries anyway; Finland, Norway and, most recently, Germany. The remaining two winners were Greece and Turkey, both old-school Eurovision stalwarts, so you could argue that they might actually belong in the second group more so than the first.
I can sum up quite easily why UK do poorly at Eurovision. And it's OUR fault. During our selection process, we had the likes of Terry "I clearly hate Eurovision" Wogan patronisingly advising us not to vote for the best song, but for the song we think the Europeans will like. So we kept sending songs to Eurovision that even we wouldn't buy. Well, Terry's gone and we're still doing it. Here are some recent examples.
In 2008, the UK sent X Factor runner-up Andy Abraham to the competition. The song charted in the UK at #67. More than a dozen UK acts were ahead of him in the chart- so why weren't any of them sent to Eurovision? The UK didn't even like the song in enough numbers to get it into the top 40. Why the hell would we expect Europe to be any different? And what was the Eurovision result? Last place.
However, the next year, something interesting happened. The BBC took it upon themselves to appoint Andrew Lloyd-Webber as the songwriter. He then enlisted American uber-hitmaker Diane Warren to collaborate with the lyrics. Straight away, you have two internationally successful, known-by-name songwriters on board. Once the UK had chosen their singer, Jade Ewen, she and Andrew began a tour of participating countries, promoting the song, getting Andrew's name out there and demonstrating how UK were finally taking the contest seriously again. The UK, having not chosen the song, were somewhat lukewarm to it, and it charted at #50. Once it did surprisingly well at Eurovision, coming an impressive 5th (FIFTH!) place, it jumped up to #27.
Last year, 80s/90s pop maestro Pete Waterman was chosen to write the UK song. Unfortunately, the resulting song sounded at least a decade out-of-date, and it backfired badly. With little of the previous year's promotion across Europe, we ended up just sending an unknown, inexperienced performer to promote yet another poor song too weak to stand for itself. It didn't go well. The song charted in the UK at a shocking #179, and we came last place. Again.
The public have had no say whatsoever in either the song or performer this year. Instead, the BBC have selected to revive boy-band Blue; a band that was successful across Europe, just half a decade ago. It is a smart idea. Denying the public the right to choose the song is not without its risks. But with our track record of selecting, maybe the BBC did the right thing this year. A large section of the British public are grumbling that the song is terrible. It isn't. Blue haven't deviated from their previous sound, so if you liked Blue last time round, you'll probably like this. If you didn't, you probably won't. "I Can" is not a "Eurovision" song, but a contemporary pop song, and a definite grower, as long as it gets heard enough.
One of the keys to success will be the song's release. By the time Germany's "Satellite" by Lena won last year, it had been a huge hit across Europe, including #1 in several competing countries. Its release was held back in the UK, so it not only got poor scores from us, but was a flash-in-the-pan minor hit after it won, charting at #30 before dropping fast. A shame, as it not only adds bona fide musical credibility to the competition by being a genuine European hit and a modern, contemporary winner that sounds like no previous winner... It's also sung in a "mockney" style that's copying British artists such as Kate Nash and Lily Allen. Last place; British act. First place; someone copying a British act. In short, it's something the UK could have done in our sleep, had we chosen to. In fact, Germany have chosen to do it again, with Lena representing Germany again this year.
Chances are, the new single from Blue would be a big hit across Europe with or without Eurovision. We just need to get it out there, promote it, play it, release it. Get it in the charts BEFORE the competition so that its popularity can grow. Luckily, the song comes out in the UK this weekend, giving it time to chart before the competition. Blue are currently touring Europe and beyond, promoting the song, rehearsing and refining their performance in the process. If the song's just not good enough, fair enough, we'll have to try harder next year. And if we win, we'll try even harder. However, we are currently second favourites to win (behind... shock horror... a Western European country, France).
If the UK can enjoy the big-budget musical competitions like The X Factor, Britain's Got Talent, Over The Rainbow, etc. etc., then why not celebrate a multinational musical showcase? One that demands original material and a live performance? The music is certainly no worse than the glorified karaoke on these talent shows, and in many cases, much better.
Eurovision is no longer just the one, annual night of television. It's a three-day event, comprising of approximately eight hours of TV. The problem is, in the UK the semi-finals are buried away on BBC3. I wonder how many people in the UK are aware that Eurovision semi finals even exist? There'll be 25 songs performed at the final on May 15th. So that means 18 songs that don't make it. And it's not the best ones that go through, trust me. Ever year at least two or three of my favourites fail to qualify, and it will certainly happen again this year. Jedward fans be aware- they're performing on Thursday night and have to qualify to make it to Saturday's final. The UK automatically qualify- Ireland don't.
The UK automatically qualify because of how much money we invest in the EBU (European Broadcasting Union, Eurovision's producers)- so why not get our money's worth and show the Eurovision Semi Finals live on prime time BBC1? Is it simply because we don't compete, so have no reason to watch? Given how infuriated we get at watching ourselves lose, it might do us some good to watch the competition with some genuine objectivity. And you never know, we might actually discover some decent pop music in the process.
With download sales now counting toward the UK chart, there is an annual stream of Eurovision songs entering after they've been heard on each contest. And it's not just the winners or UK entries. So the music that people like is out there, and in the competition. It's a shame that we in the UK choose to give them just the one day of exposure. For some reason, the UK releases are held back until the last minute. The songs will be performed on the show, chart (maybe), then promptly be forgotten about.
Across Europe, massive shows similar to X Factor exist purely FOR Eurovision. This is our/their chance to sell music to over 40 other countries. Why even consider sending anything but the very best to represent your country?
The next time you complain that Europeans don't want to give us any points, ask yourselves, "which came first? The crappy scores, or our lack of interest?" Cry political, if you like, but you're wrong. We're not being punished because we're British. We're not even being punished because we're not taking it seriously. We're not as important to the rest of Europe as we like to think we are. We're just not submitting music that people, even in our own country, want to vote for, buy or listen to. And we're missing out on some great European music in the process.
Here's hoping that Blue finally persuade us to buck the trend.
Living in the UK, I know that I am in the vast VAST minority of those who absolutely adore Eurovision. And I don't mean in an ironic, sneery, let's-all-laugh-at-the-foreigners kind of way. In a genuine, music-loving way. Yes, the kitsch, glitter, cheese, costumes and dodgy choreography aren't (always) to be taken seriously, and I can laugh at it, as much as I can laugh with it. Anyone who's read my American Idol/X Factor blogs can attest to that. If I hated the shows as much as I appear to, I wouldn't watch them.
But I honestly wish that the UK took Eurovision more seriously, for simple, sensible reasons. And it's not because we haven't won for 14 years.
British music has always been at the forefront of the world's music scene, particularly the Western world. America may have taken over, and British acts famously struggle in the States- but in Europe, many British acts are as successful across Europe (and indeed the world) as they are at home. So why don't we do better at Eurovision?
The loudest cry is "politics". I cry back, "bollocks". Yes, there are a few countries that may choose to do so (Greece and Cyprus- GUILTY!), and it would be naive to suggest otherwise. But it's only on a limited scale. Each country gets 10 votes (totalling 58 points), and all the bias in the world can't affect a barrage of decent scores from the countries that voted on the music. There may be 25 countries performing in the final, but all 43 participating countries get to vote, even if eliminated at the semifinals. This makes a total of 2494 points on offer.
Plus, we have to bear in mind that several countries simply share tastes more so than politics, so a jaunty song full of accordions and fiddles will likely go down better in one country than a boy band ballad would, and vice versa in another country. Statistics show that the UK is as guilty of "political" bias, as we nearly always vote for Ireland, Sweden and Greece. But is it out of some sense of political affiliation, or because we simply share a more similar musical taste?
The biggest "political" grumble of late has been that of Eastern Europe vs Western Europe. In particular, over the last decade, a huge number of winners have been from dissolved Eastern European states. Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Croatia and Russia- all newcomers, all neighbours, many used to belong to the same country, all "obviously" voting for each other, right? Well, no. All of those winners were getting high scores from neighbours, but they couldn't have won without a substantial vote from the Western countries as well. Three of the other five winners were Western countries anyway; Finland, Norway and, most recently, Germany. The remaining two winners were Greece and Turkey, both old-school Eurovision stalwarts, so you could argue that they might actually belong in the second group more so than the first.
I can sum up quite easily why UK do poorly at Eurovision. And it's OUR fault. During our selection process, we had the likes of Terry "I clearly hate Eurovision" Wogan patronisingly advising us not to vote for the best song, but for the song we think the Europeans will like. So we kept sending songs to Eurovision that even we wouldn't buy. Well, Terry's gone and we're still doing it. Here are some recent examples.
In 2008, the UK sent X Factor runner-up Andy Abraham to the competition. The song charted in the UK at #67. More than a dozen UK acts were ahead of him in the chart- so why weren't any of them sent to Eurovision? The UK didn't even like the song in enough numbers to get it into the top 40. Why the hell would we expect Europe to be any different? And what was the Eurovision result? Last place.
However, the next year, something interesting happened. The BBC took it upon themselves to appoint Andrew Lloyd-Webber as the songwriter. He then enlisted American uber-hitmaker Diane Warren to collaborate with the lyrics. Straight away, you have two internationally successful, known-by-name songwriters on board. Once the UK had chosen their singer, Jade Ewen, she and Andrew began a tour of participating countries, promoting the song, getting Andrew's name out there and demonstrating how UK were finally taking the contest seriously again. The UK, having not chosen the song, were somewhat lukewarm to it, and it charted at #50. Once it did surprisingly well at Eurovision, coming an impressive 5th (FIFTH!) place, it jumped up to #27.
Last year, 80s/90s pop maestro Pete Waterman was chosen to write the UK song. Unfortunately, the resulting song sounded at least a decade out-of-date, and it backfired badly. With little of the previous year's promotion across Europe, we ended up just sending an unknown, inexperienced performer to promote yet another poor song too weak to stand for itself. It didn't go well. The song charted in the UK at a shocking #179, and we came last place. Again.
The public have had no say whatsoever in either the song or performer this year. Instead, the BBC have selected to revive boy-band Blue; a band that was successful across Europe, just half a decade ago. It is a smart idea. Denying the public the right to choose the song is not without its risks. But with our track record of selecting, maybe the BBC did the right thing this year. A large section of the British public are grumbling that the song is terrible. It isn't. Blue haven't deviated from their previous sound, so if you liked Blue last time round, you'll probably like this. If you didn't, you probably won't. "I Can" is not a "Eurovision" song, but a contemporary pop song, and a definite grower, as long as it gets heard enough.
One of the keys to success will be the song's release. By the time Germany's "Satellite" by Lena won last year, it had been a huge hit across Europe, including #1 in several competing countries. Its release was held back in the UK, so it not only got poor scores from us, but was a flash-in-the-pan minor hit after it won, charting at #30 before dropping fast. A shame, as it not only adds bona fide musical credibility to the competition by being a genuine European hit and a modern, contemporary winner that sounds like no previous winner... It's also sung in a "mockney" style that's copying British artists such as Kate Nash and Lily Allen. Last place; British act. First place; someone copying a British act. In short, it's something the UK could have done in our sleep, had we chosen to. In fact, Germany have chosen to do it again, with Lena representing Germany again this year.
Chances are, the new single from Blue would be a big hit across Europe with or without Eurovision. We just need to get it out there, promote it, play it, release it. Get it in the charts BEFORE the competition so that its popularity can grow. Luckily, the song comes out in the UK this weekend, giving it time to chart before the competition. Blue are currently touring Europe and beyond, promoting the song, rehearsing and refining their performance in the process. If the song's just not good enough, fair enough, we'll have to try harder next year. And if we win, we'll try even harder. However, we are currently second favourites to win (behind... shock horror... a Western European country, France).
If the UK can enjoy the big-budget musical competitions like The X Factor, Britain's Got Talent, Over The Rainbow, etc. etc., then why not celebrate a multinational musical showcase? One that demands original material and a live performance? The music is certainly no worse than the glorified karaoke on these talent shows, and in many cases, much better.
Eurovision is no longer just the one, annual night of television. It's a three-day event, comprising of approximately eight hours of TV. The problem is, in the UK the semi-finals are buried away on BBC3. I wonder how many people in the UK are aware that Eurovision semi finals even exist? There'll be 25 songs performed at the final on May 15th. So that means 18 songs that don't make it. And it's not the best ones that go through, trust me. Ever year at least two or three of my favourites fail to qualify, and it will certainly happen again this year. Jedward fans be aware- they're performing on Thursday night and have to qualify to make it to Saturday's final. The UK automatically qualify- Ireland don't.
The UK automatically qualify because of how much money we invest in the EBU (European Broadcasting Union, Eurovision's producers)- so why not get our money's worth and show the Eurovision Semi Finals live on prime time BBC1? Is it simply because we don't compete, so have no reason to watch? Given how infuriated we get at watching ourselves lose, it might do us some good to watch the competition with some genuine objectivity. And you never know, we might actually discover some decent pop music in the process.
With download sales now counting toward the UK chart, there is an annual stream of Eurovision songs entering after they've been heard on each contest. And it's not just the winners or UK entries. So the music that people like is out there, and in the competition. It's a shame that we in the UK choose to give them just the one day of exposure. For some reason, the UK releases are held back until the last minute. The songs will be performed on the show, chart (maybe), then promptly be forgotten about.
Across Europe, massive shows similar to X Factor exist purely FOR Eurovision. This is our/their chance to sell music to over 40 other countries. Why even consider sending anything but the very best to represent your country?
The next time you complain that Europeans don't want to give us any points, ask yourselves, "which came first? The crappy scores, or our lack of interest?" Cry political, if you like, but you're wrong. We're not being punished because we're British. We're not even being punished because we're not taking it seriously. We're not as important to the rest of Europe as we like to think we are. We're just not submitting music that people, even in our own country, want to vote for, buy or listen to. And we're missing out on some great European music in the process.
Here's hoping that Blue finally persuade us to buck the trend.
Posts
Great. As if to rub it in, BBC have decided to put the first episode of the new series of The Apprentice on the same night (and time) as the first semi final. It's one of their top-rated, most talked about shows. The other channels don't stand a chance, let alone a minor channel like BBC3.
ReplyDelete