You Go, Susan Boyle!

Unless you've been hiding in a linen closet somewhere, you know who Susan Boyle is... The almost 48 year old frumpy single woman who wowed Simon Cowell and the audience three weeks ago on Britain's Got Talent.
It took almost a week for me to catch up, but I when I finally got curious about the furor, I watched the television rebroadcast on YouTube about 8 times. That's how much I enjoyed it.

I also have enjoyed sort of following some of the other "stuff" that has surrounded her recent celebrity. I enjoyed watching the interview a local reporter did with her at her house. I enjoyed seeing her in a new black leather motorcycle style jacket. I even sort of enjoyed her foray into brown hair dye.

What I haven't enjoyed reading is a few reporters denigrating her story. I understand that it is important to appear to be TOO sophisticated to be duped. Fine, don't be duped. Yet, where is the deception uncovered? I haven't seen or read it.

Time Entertainment goes to great pains to point out that a talent scout for Britain's Got Talent asked Susan Boyle to appear on the show. That because the local people all knew she could sing very well. That's what talent scouts around Britain are supposed to be doing. Asking people who sings well and then listening to the answer.... Oh, and let's not forget that she took some singing lessons. If that was enough to make that kind of difference I'd be thrilled. I took singing lessons and I'll bet you'd pay me not to sing.

What is important to realize is that it was unlikely that Susan Boyle would have come forward without prompting. She had been rejected before. She is older. She is accustomed to living in a small and protected environment. What she did took courage, even with an invite from the talent scout.

So, Time Entertainment reporter.... take a deep breath and enjoy the show. You haven't been duped, and no one thinks you have.

Worse, though, I read a couple of comments from other sources, who I don't feel like paying the compliment of naming here, that Susan Boyle's singing was nothing special. It was suggested that, had she been gorgeous instead of frumpy, that the standard would have been harder, higher, better.

I am trying to imagine anyone giving a better rendition of that particular song then she did. The range is broad, and she managed to get the high notes, low notes, and middle notes. There are several modulations in key, and yet her pitch remained perfect. The song requires great dynamic range, and she delivered.

There are only three possible ways to think of such an ugly reaction. The first would be to consider the writer mean-spirited. One would hope that is not the case. The second possibility might be that the writer is scared to the bone of being duped, so this was the fence erected. The third possibility is that the writer is, in fact, so ignorant of the difficulty and requirements of good song delivery that just simple ignorance guided the writing.

Of course, it's hard to know how to respond the people who didn't like the song. I am sort of surprised that they thought someone like Susan Boyle would have chosen something different. Perhaps they would have preferred her to do a nice rap tune?

Susan Boyle, you go girl. Enjoy your fifteen minutes of fame and see if you can't get a savings account for yourself out of it. But, first, ask the Britain's Got Talent folk, some people from the church you trust, and whatever family members you can also trust to get you some protection. Without it, mean-spirited, or scared and jealous, or ignorant people, will eventually hurt you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnmbJzH93NU
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1893282,00.html?cnn=yes