Hyperbole

As should be readily apparent, I like words.  I like communication.  I prefer that it be less opaque typically, although I do enjoy allusion, chiasmus, metaphor, simile and other rhetorical devices.  Every once in awhile, even hyperbole is all right.  But it's run amok.

Karen enjoys The Voice, both for the singers it presents and for the most beautiful man God ever created, Adam Levine.  I will admit he seems like a nice guy.  And I'll admit that compared to American Idol, it's far superior with the talent it draws.  Some of the singers that have appeared on the show are very, very talented.  Aside from that, it provokes a meh from me.

What I noticed, however, is that the show is given to taking hyperbole to new heights.  Forgive me, but I don't know the titles of the various rounds in which the contestants sing, but what I'm describing happens almost regularly after the vetting process that starts each season. Some people sing off against each other, sometimes singing at the same time, which somehow gives the four judges an idea of which is a better singer -- although I have no idea how.  Then there are the individual performances, some of which are quite good, others grating on the ears.

But what cracks me up is the constant praise couched in elevated terms that comes from not only the judges but also Carson Daly, the host.  I don't know much about Mr. Daly, who seems congenial enough, but from my perspective, he's about the most wooden television host I've ever seen.  I can't believe that someone with the good sense to dump Tara Reid can be that stiff, that boring, but he comes off that way.  Which makes his comments after a contestant is singing all the funnier to me.

After a contestant finishes a song, Daly is the first person to comment before he tosses it to the judges for their comments.  Almost invariably, Daly rates the performance as incredible, or amazing, or fantastic. Given that this is a competition, I would have thought that there had to be some differentiation between the contestants' efforts.  To hear Daly state it, every one of the contestants is superior.  That simply can't be.

I understand the notion of being polite and complimenting them, but is hyperbole supposed to be trotted out every single time?  Doesn't that lessen the value of the compliment when contestant after contestant does something incredibly, or amazingly or fantasticly?

To put it another way, since the show is about finding the next great singer, what's so incredible or amazing about a good performance?  By diluting the meaning of the words he overuses, Daly cheapens the show's ultimate aim.

Not that the audience has any qualms about this.  They cheer rabidly during and after each contestant's song as if Whitney Houston had just risen from the dead to reprise her national anthem.  I can understand cheering to support the contestants and even being appreciative of the efforts.  But to overstate the result doesn't do anyone any good.

Then it's the judges' turn.  Aside from repeating what Mr. Daly says in the loftiest of terms, the judges then fawn all over the contestants, telling them how much they love them, how much they love their voices, etc. It's a wonder they call this a competition at all.  The judges drone on about how wonderful, incredible, fantastic and amazing the singer was.  I thought the role of the judge was to be critical.

What's odd about this is that the judges should know better.  What they're doing is equating the contestants with their own peers, people who have performed for a living for years and in many cases who have received accolades that exceed what their voices merit.

To be fair, the judges do offer constructive criticism during the vetting round.  And more than that, they're kind with the criticism, unlike judges on other shows who seem to delight in being as snarky as they can when offering criticism.  Unless a contestant asks for it, I see little reason in belittling the person on national television, and The Voices's judges are pretty good about that.  But for as tame as they are when rejecting a contestant, they're not critical at all when it comes to actually judging the competitive rounds portion of the show.

Perhaps I'm too cynical.  Perhaps I'm too old.  But it seems that praise and criticism has reached lunatic levels, the one being over-the-top and the other, in some instances, being too cruel.  I would reserve the elevated rhetoric for those performances that really stand out.

(c) 2013 The Truxton Spangler Chronicles