Wiston Papers

Which America are we?  The "American Idol" or the American Ideal?

Americans don’t want definitive resolutions to the topics or issues of our times.  We engage in acrimony rather than seek answers; we incite confrontation rather than invite consensus; we  provoke debate rather than pursue decision;  we revel in struggle to avoid solution.

At least that is the conclusion from observing how Washington handled the recent fiscal erosion debacle.

Ironically this is a stark contradiction to the stereotype we have of ourselves.  An image we export and one that has inspired millions around the globe.  Much of the world views the United States as a nation of rugged individualism; a promise of success from hard work; the land of equal opportunities; a people who embrace a strong sense of right and wrong.  We are the champions we boast.

Put another way; every American wants to win; everyone hates to lose.  We no longer really believe in the adage “It’s not whether you win or lose; it’s how you play the game.” Most Americans discarded that philosophy years ago.

We are a competitive society and we cannot refrain from picking winners and losers.  But we attempt this in various ways that are both ingenuous and laughable.  

The truth is we are more willing to applaud pretend champions in arenas of little importance rather than demand demonstrable excellence in struggles of significance.

Let’s examine this by contrasting our expectations of public service in America with entertainment.

Here are some examples:  the Bowl Championship Series (BSC)  national football game Monday night, the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences (Oscars) next month, and a score of competitions throughout the year ranging from the Emmys for television performance to Bluegrass Music, as well as Art and Photography.  All will crown persons and performances that purportedly are better than the competition.  

The truth, in fact, is that Americans are averse to legitimate contests and accurate evaluation.  We mollify mediocrity behind a masquerade of merit.

The universities of Notre Dame and Alabama will play a football game for the mythical national championship.  It’s a meaningless charade, of course.  Both teams arrived at Monday’s moment solely by virtue of a popularity vote rather than a playoff that would guarantee that both schools were legitimate contenders.  Absent that format, it’s only your opinion against mine.  No true college champion will be emerge from Monday’s game.

Next month the Academy of Motion Pictures and Sciences will hand out Oscars to various alleged winners for meritorious performance in movies.  Again, it’s a beauty pageant rather than recognition of actual talent.

The most likely films to be nominated as best motion picture have little in common: “Lincoln,” “Argo,” “Zero Dark Thirty,” “Les Miserables,” and “Silver Linings Playbook.”

Equally incomparable is the acting of leading male contenders Daniel Day-Lewis, John Hawkes, Denzel Washington, Hugh Jackman and Joaquin Phoenix.  The most likely female nominees will be Jessica Chastain, Jennifer Lawrence, Naomi Watts, Emmanuelle Riva and Quvenzhane Wallis.  They, too, have such discrete roles as to make any legitimate analysis impossible.

A true contest would compare each actor and actress’s performance in the same role of the same film--such as Cordelia in Shakespeare’s “King Lear” or Falstaff in “The Merry Wives of Windsor.”

Instead, the Academy serves up a mixture of apples and oranges and asks up to name the best fruit.  An impossible task.

Equally unappetizing is the prospect of picking the best Bluegrass song or performance at the Telluride Troubador Contest in June.  We’ll be treated to a range of genre from Progressive, Gospel, Neo-Traditional and Redgrass.  None can be fairly compared because each is different.  But purported winners will be named.

Art truly is in the eye of the beholder.  How and why should we argue that the Baroque painters Caravaggio, Rembrandt and Vermeer are superior to the Modernists Matisse, Impressionist Manet or Cubist Picasso?

That, however, is exactly what various art competitions and exhibits this year will demand of those who seek recognition...entrants will attempt to emulate the structure of the masters.  Style as unique and disparate as the genre themselves makes any attempt to compare contestants in multiple categories both ridiculous and pointless.  Nevertheless, winners will be announced.

Honesty dictates that we admit that it’s impossible to rate any contestant superior to another when there is no comparable criterion.  On the contrary, we would be better off celebrating the quality of diversity in athletics, performance, music and art instead of claiming superiority.  Absent specific criteria for legitimate evaluation and assessment, we should not label these different presentations as either winners or losers.  Rather, we should acknowledge the truth.

This was a game well played; a theatrical or film performance that was a delight; a song of joy and meaning; a picture or photograph of inspiration.  Nothing more and nothing less.  

Yes, we will continue to debate.  We’ll argue that my team, my favorite actor, musician or artist is better than yours.  As long as we are honest with ourselves and concede that these are only opinions that’s fine.  Our parlor debates about the best athletic team, actor, artist or musician should be entertaining escapism.  We should not make more of these exchanges than they are.  These are moments of leisurely rejoinders of no serious consequence.

But when we delude ourselves that we alone are the repositories of wisdom, correctness or legitimacy we make a mockery of the truth and reveal ourselves as fools..unworthy of attention or credibility.  

Unfortunately, that too often is the nature of our elected and appointed leaders.  We should hold Washington, state and local decision-makers to a high standard.  Their words do matter and their actions even more.

It’s time for serious talk, serious resolve, and serious action by the persons we elected in November.  Unless Washington and local governments are prepared to act responsibly, their results and claims will be as mythical as the competitions cited above.  Allegations of accomplishment that are false.  Assertions of achievement that are lies.

The problems facing America demand heroic action by winners.  But we have none in charge nor do we want them.

U.S. voters knew--coming into the November national elections--that our elected leaders were at loggerheads.  Neither major political party was willing to budge from its ideological stance even in the face of undeniable evidence that their truculence would forestall adoption of critically necessary legislation.  

Despite this painful truth, American voters cast ballots for the status quo.  Thus guaranteeing several more years of wrongheaded discussions by government leaders who see in their re-election a mandate to continue their vacuous or vitriolic diatribes in order to deflect responsibility and to escape leadership.  Courage has long been absent from both the White House and Congress.  November’s vote assured continued cowardice by local and national leaders.  Had Americans wanted change we would have voted accordingly.  We did not.

Sadly, it seems, Americans now prefer the “American Idol” rather than the American Ideal.  

Steve Coon

January 07, 2013