Author: adviser

Fox’s new competitive singing show, The Four: Battle for Stardom, aired its first episode on January 4, 2018. Potential candidates apply online and are chosen to perform for the show. Once chosen, the singers, also known as the “challengers” are presented in front of the panel of judges. The panel consists of DJ Khaled, Sean “Diddy” Combs, Meghan Trainor, and Charlie Walk, alongside the host Fergie. However, Walk will not be judging the season finale episode due to allegations of sexual misconduct. Before it aired on television, the judges searched the earth for the best four contestants to start the show. The original members were Lex Lu (32), Ash Minor (23), Elanese Lansen (22), and Blair Perkins (25).

The challenger performs a song for the judges and the crowd. A challenge occurs when the challenger receives four blue rings on the stage. The contestant cannot advance with a single red ring. The judges give the artist feedback on their performance. Then the artist can choose who to challenge.

The chosen member of the four performs their song, then the challenger performs their second song. The crowd votes on the best performance and the winner takes their seat on the four. The goal for each contestant is to land a seat on the four hoping to be signed with Republic Records.

Personally, I like the concept of this show. Overall, I think the show is decent. My problem though is that the judges are very biased and sometimes they let quality talent slip away.

One contestant on the first episode, Zhavia (16), was the favorite of the judges from the beginning. Her voice is different, a bit deep and weird for my liking, but I still believe she has talent. She challenged Elanese and took her place as one of the four. I thought Elanese, with her latina vibe and angelic voice, should have won.

The judges put too much emphasis and importance on style, stage presence, and uniqueness than the actual talent itself. For example, Anthony Hall, Valentina Cytrynowicz, Kayla Ember, Stevie Brock, Cocoa Sarai, Sean Cavaliere, Edi Callier, and Josh Wyper are all amazing singers but were denied the chance to challenge one of the four.

All the judges are notorious for saying, “I don’t know if you are better than the four,” which means they will not let a challenge happen. How would the judges know if they do not allow them a challenge?

They do not want to lose their favorite artists like Zhavia in a challenge. The other singers have talent but they deny it because of their biases. If the judges want Zhavia to be the winner then they should cancel the rest of the season.

The judges’ commentary on the performances is mediocre at best. None of them can compare to Simon Cowell’s feedback. I do not think all four judges should have to agree in order for a singer to advance. The panel is not going to always agree. If a challenger receives three votes, it would be logical to allow them a challenge. Aren’t the people, the audience, supposed to be choosing a singer anyway? The judges need to stop manipulating who stays on the four.

When Zhavia lost her seat on the fourth episode to Kendyle Paige (20), Meghan Trainor cried. Trainor seemed to indicate hesitance about letting Kendyle challenge because she knew that Zhavia might lose. Kendyle sang better than Zhavia and the crowd took notice. Zhavia had been dealing with problems with her voice, but with Kendyle’s sweet demeanor and growl, there was a clear winner.

In episode five, the judges had four comeback artists perform to reclaim their seat. Ash Minor’s rendition of Bruno Mars’, “When I was your man,” was better than Zhavia’s cover of “Bodak Yellow.” But the judges picked Zhavia and she dethroned Tim Johnson Jr (18). I loved Tim’s voice, stage presence, and personality. He was #robbed.

Walk mentioned once that he is not necessarily looking for the most talented artist, but the “whole package.” This is the reason why we end up with mediocre talent in the music industry.

Restrooms seem to be the hot spot for vandalism, but the graffiti in some bathrooms are positive. What was known as the Sad Girls Club came to an end when the P buildings were disoccupied. The bathroom located near the bungalows had walls and doors that contained questions, conversations, thoughts, and support for young ladies in all the colors and handwritings. Love, hate, sad, emotional, and happy poems were written in the walls. Rude comments were often written but others were quick to write the bright side of such words. “You are strong, worth it, beautiful, pretty,” were in bold letters, standing out from all the other comments. The Sad Girls Club was a supportive place in the ladies’ restroom where girls share their deep experiences and real stories, it was a way of expression and communication.

But like any other restroom, their walls are more than just a notepad or a juicy confesion board for highschool students, these conversations don’t belong in a classroom environment therefore sharing a comment privately and completely anonymous lifts the weight of pain off someone’s chest and it truly shows that girls can be very supportive of each other. Plus, reading the bathroom walls is a great way to waste time on days that you feel like being a rebel by taking a little longer to go to class, which only happens like once a year, right?

Already on a few occasions this year many of the women’s restrooms were surprised by many bright and positive post it notes on the bathroom mirrors. Whoever takes the time to write and display ecstatic quotes deserves a thank you because somedays a girl just needs to be reminded that she is unique.

The graffiti may not be the schools priority, but keeping the bathrooms cleaned and walls erased is for safety reasons. And even though the apparent graffiti goal is to be as harmless as possible, the California Education Code for Student Discipline: Education code, section 48900 states that a student may be suspended or expelled by causing or attempting to cause damage to school or private property. So I don’t in anyway encourage anyone to damage the restrooms, yet I still love the idea that the girls bathroom graffiti is positive.

As a token of condolences, the world renowned artist Jeff Koons donated a monumental sculpture titled “Bouquet of Tulips” to France in wake of the 2015 Paris terrorist attacks. As a gift to the victims and their families, the statue is intended to be in the center of the city and widely recognizable as a Jeff Koons piece. In the artwork, an arrangement of flowers are held high by a caucasian fist as a nod to the Statue of Liberty located in New York City. The people of France gifted us kindly with it in 1886 and America now is returning the favor.

However, many are saying that Koons’ donation to the French is closer to self-promotion than commemoration. The site of the artwork is not even remotely close to the location of the attack, the Bataclan concert hall and its surrounding restaurants where terrorists killed 130 people and wounded hundreds. In fact, the piece is supposed to be placed beside the Palais de Tokyo, a space solely dedicated to young emerging artists–which Koons is certainly not.

While I disagree for the most part, I do see where the french artists are coming from in saying that it is a selfish and disrespectful act. With US President Trump and French President Macron at great odds on the subject of climate change, it is important to handle our historic alliance with care. Koons’ efforts are only an extension of the artist’s and the states’ gratitude in remaining by our side. Artists are often regarded as brash and presumptuous, but just because they are seen that way does not mean their intentions are like so. It’s like seeing someone with a bad case of RBF and automatically assuming they’re a she-dog.

The tulips are a symbol of optimism, “universal values that the US and France share,” as Koons told the french morning newspaper, Le Figaro, back in 2016. In that same article, the mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, described the gift as “a beautiful and generous gesture, which testifies to the very strong friendship between our two countries,” and explained that “Those who explain that Jeff Koons is not a great artist are the same ones who dedicated him as such.”

Although Koons is keen on following through with his French-installation art, the people of France have been hesitant to accept his gift with open arms. Critics in the art industry and beyond have largely balked at the massive structure and there is a definite possibility of the piece not ending up on foreign soil at all.