Eurovision Rants

[Rant] Authentic vs. Mainstream

(Okay so, this topic will mainly focus on these 2 subjects, often labeled in Eurovision songs through one way or another, directly or indirectly.
Also, we needed something to kinda celebrate the 40th page.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mentalities differ. That's not a new thing.

So does countries' approach to Eurovision Song Contest.

With those said and done, today I'm going to rant about what basically composes the entirety of Eurovision songs, from 1956 all the way till now, and clarify these 2 elements often prevalent.

And I'm talking about authenticity and mainstream.

Of course, these 2 can be fused to make one song which can appeal to the radio and yet which presents something ethnic through an element (like dancing, language, even musical genre).

However, very few songs which combined these 2 managed to pull it through in the contest or even win it.
(a good example of this would be My Number One, which won the edition in 2005. It used elements clearly native, especially in the instrumental and the dancing, but it also had that hook which basically would appeal greatly to the radio)

Authenticity is joggled every so often with the term of originality, which has the tendency to get confused in the meanwhile.

Originality is basically what's the word in itself: do something or make something that's never been done before.
(aka someone stop Romania untill they invent some other messy combined genre of music like rap-yodel, please, thank you)

Authenticity, however, in my way of saying it, "screams that country's name (or region/minority) front, back and sideways". It doesn't mean entirely original, but rather more distinguishable.

From instruments to dancing, to the language used or even type of voice, authenticity is usually that kind of spark, traditional being or even cultural, native to their lands, and which easily stands out from their crowd.

Basically, there's a lot of ways on how to deliver authenticity in Eurovision. It depends if it fits with the entire package though.

Meanwhile, a mainstream song in Eurovision is basically close to similar of whatever trends on the radio or is generally radio-friendly.

With planned choreography or generally around close tempos, the mainstream songs would either try to upflift the audience and bring them to dance, or try to be emotional and somewhat genuine, trying to deliver the entire emotion in front of people.

They can incorporate a lot of props, from choreography to digital backgrounds, from lightnings to surprises or even ridiculous elements which make them extremely worthy of memes.

Just as having an authentic song, having a mainstream song requires a lot of ways and ideas in order to stand out. However, in this case, it doesn't rely as much on traditional instruments or native language to convey the distinctive feature. Usually some good synths or impressive dance routines can do the trick here.

Which brings us to the rant...

Since 2014 (or so I remember that from there it started escalating really badly) I feel like the majority of the europals seem to contradict themselves regarding the winners.

Let me give you an example on this one.
I skipped Conchita's win in 2014 because people didn't really focus on the song to go in a major rampage on, but rather the appearance.

| Mans wins in 2015 |

People: OMG THIS SONG ONLY WON BECAUSE OF ITS PERFORMANCE WHILE THE SONG IS PRETTY MUCH PLAGIATED FROM DAVID GUETTA'S "LOVERS OF THE SUN", WE NEED A WINNER IN ITS NATIVE LANGUAGE!1!!11!
(Usually this applied to those hardcore Italy 2015 stans.)

"Heroes" is a good example of a mainstream song which didn't really focus on any kind of ethnic instrumentals or any of that sort. It was straight-to-the-point, meant to stand out both musically and visually, with a catchy hook and chorus & a gem for the radio to overplay.

| Jamala wins in 2016 |

People: OMG THIS SONG WON ONLY BECAUSE IT RELIED ON POLITICAL ISSUES, HER VOICE IS AWFUL AND IT LITERALLY DIDN'T WIN NOR JURIES NOR TELEVOTING, EUROVISION IS ONLY POLITICS AND THAT'S IT!1!!11

2 years after she won and "1944" is still probably among the most controvesial recent winners we've had to date.
Including as main topic the struggle that Crimean Tatars had to endure under the rule of the Soviet Union, it delivers raw emotion on stage. Her voice is unique and it's clearly authentic, and she also includes two verses in Crimean Tatar just for the cherry on the top.

| Salvador wins in 2017 |

People: OMG OMG OMG THIS GUY WON JUST BECAUSE HE FAKED HIS HEART PROBLEM TO GAIN PITY VOICE ALSO HE LOOKS LIKE THAT MOUSE FROM RATATOILLE AND MOVES LIKE HE'S DRUNK, THE SONG IS BORING AS HELL, DIDN'T DESERVED TO WIN!11!!!

When it comes to "Amar Pelos Dois", it was obvious that after it gained a big following, would eventually end up really high.
The last winner singing fully in its native language nowadays, Salvador's method of how to convey emotion was entirely different from other artists, emphasizing on gestures and mimics while performing the song.
Plus, it's a bossa nova song. Portugal is often notorious for delivering in Eurovision their own little genres of music, especially fado. Screams authentic to me.

| Netta wins in 2018 |

People: OMG THIS FATTIE WON WITH A JOKE SONG, EUROVISION IS NOT ANYMORE ABOUT GOOD QUALITY MUSIC, NOW IT'S A WHOLE BIG POLITICAL CIRCUS WITH FARM MUSIC!!1!11

"Toy" does sound a bit ridiculous to a non-Eurovision fan indeed, especially considering the chicken noises and the very beginning with the "ooh, ha, la" kind-of thing.
However, leaving those aside, the song is a literal earworm, with an infectious chorus and a charismatic artist. It does include a few ethnic elements like the music during the second set of verses, after her part.
It's still a radio-friendly song, but with a funny twist.

What do you see in common?
2 things:

1. all 4 of them alternate between authentic and mainstream sounding, and distinguish themselves in one way or another;
2. it gains a fanbase throughout the Eurovision National Selections period, but after they win, they're immediately trashed like no other;

So if you might wonder which one is the best alternative...
....I guess it's safe to say both are equal in Eurovision.

However, I always appreciated some authentic stuff coming from countries. Usually the radio-friendly stuff what some try to give in the contest have the tendency to sound exactly the same and I'm not really a big fan of it. Therefore, yeah, I prefer being slapped in the face with stuff that screams their country than stuff which could be radio-friendly.

Then again, it's good to have both, best of both worlds but it's hard to achieve the perfect combination in order to win it all.