#Sister Sweden | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

beauty-and-passion · 1 year

Text

Eurovision and the jury’s problem (but mostly the jury’s problem)

Ah, the Eurovision national juries. I love them so much. My love is so big that, since I started this tradition of writing a post about Eurovision, I’ve always included one paragraph to openly express my love for them and, not surprisingly, my love took the shape of FUCK YOU JURY.

So this year gave me the final push to do more research and finally give them the post they deserve, in which I will finally explain why they do more harm than good and are generally useless.

If that’s what you wanted to know, you can close the post now, thank you for your time. But if you want to know why I think the jury is useless, then allow me to expand more and properly explain myself.

_______________________

The jury has always been part of the show!

Yes, but now always with the same power.

Let’s do a bit of history: Eurovision started in the 50s, right after the end of WW2. TV was starting to grow stronger and with the birth of the EBU, they were searching for a TV program that could’ve involved and united all nations.

And so, an Italian journalist said: “Hey, here in Italy we have this sick song competition called Sanremo. We can make something similar, but every European country should send an artist.”. Marcel Bezençon, general manager of the EBU at the time, liked the idea and, after a few meetings, it was decided to make this music competition that will become Eurovision.

So yes, this is how Eurovision started. It’s because of Sanremo. It’s because of Italy. My country might do stupid shit, but we are still able to do something good once in a while.

The first edition counted 7 countries: Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, The Netherlands and Switzerland. Four of them will become the “Big Five”, because they are the ones that put more money into this competition. Other countries will slowly join in.

The jury was first introduced because, well, there was no possible way to call every single person who was watching the show. The TV was still in its infancy, let alone the global communications, so of course there was a jury. IT was the only way.

However, over time the televoting system was born and it started to improve. In 1997 five countries used it for the first time and from the year after all countries could use it. The jury was left in the back and used only under exceptional circumstances when televoting was not possible.

This lasted from 1997 to 2009. Then from 2010 it started the 50/50 system.

So yes, the jury has always been part of the show. But at first it was present because it was the only way to choose a winner, then it was pushed in the back, only to regain more power in the last 10 years.

But hey, you may ask: since Eurovision has been inspired by Sanremo, maybe this is how Sanremo voting system works too, right?

Nope. We are Italians, so we should make the most complicated voting system ever. Sanremo is currently articulated in five evenings and every evening has different juries and different ways to vote. I won’t go into too much detail because it’s bonkers, but I can tell you that:

1) There are multiple juries: the public, a jury made of 150 accredited representatives and the opinion poll jury. This one in particular is a group of people chosen by the national public broadcasting company RAI (which broadcasts Sanremo) out of a sample of habitual music users and selected according to criteria of age/geographical origin.

So no, the system is completely different and yes, this system is evolving too, because the opinion poll jury counted 1000 people last year, this year only 300 and who knows how many there will be in the future.

2) The final result is the sum of all three votes: 33% of the final voting is made of the representative’s jury, 33% of the opinion poll jury and 34% of the televoting. So even if by just one measly point, the televoting is the most important one out of the three.

Is this system perfect? No, it doesn’t work either and it’s fucking complicated. But at least it acknowledges that the public deserves to have more power than the juries. And there is also more than one jury, which at least allows a wider vision of things.

_______________________

The jury is here because it brings more variety!

Aww, how adorable.

I specifically searched for every single winning song from 1997 to 2023, thus including both the years without jury (1997-2008) and the ones with jury (2009-2023). I checked which is the musical genre of every winning song.

Do you want to know which genre won the most? Pop.

Do you want to know how many times a pop song won in the years without jury (including europop and latin-pop)? 9 times.

Do you want to know how many times a pop song won in the years with jury (including folk-pop, dance-pop and electro-pop)? 10 times.

Please, tell me more about the variety the jury brings. Can’t wait to hear it.

_______________________

The jury is here because it brings variety 2: Englishvision

Europe: a country with a shit ton of languages and we use always the same one for singing.

Do you want to know how many times we had a winning song that wasn’t in English from 1997 to 2023? 7 times and in two of them there were English parts.

The first three winners come from the years without jury (Dana International - "Diva", Ruslana - "Wild Dances", Marija Šerifović - "Molitva"). The others come from the years with jury and my god we had to fight tooth and nail to have them:

Jamala - "1944"

Salvador Sobral - "Amar Pelos Dois"

Måneskin - "Zitti e buoni"

Kalush Orchestra - "Stefania"

Those are people’s winners. Well, except for Jamala who no one wanted as a winner, because the public wanted Russia and the jury Australia. However, let’s leave it in for now: it’s a particular case I want to talk about later.

What I want to let you know is that, in order to have these winners, the public had to do a massive collective effort to give them enough points to overcome the jury - especially the last two. And if you know them, it’s because they are in the top 10 list of the public’s favorites.

But what if I tell you we could’ve had two more songs in their native languages on this list?

In 2015 the public’s favourite was Italy with Il Volo. An Italian song, genre classical music. It lost against Sweden’s pop song.

In 2023 the public’s massive favourite was, as you know, Finland. A Finnish song, genre hyperpop/industrial metal. It lost against Sweden’s pop song.

What a strange coincidence, isn’t it? Both times a song in a native language lost against an English pop song. Both times, the public’s favourite lost because the jury’s favourite won. Both times it was against Sweden.

Please, tell me again about the fairness of this system and how much variety it brings.

________________________

The jury is here because the eastern countries all vote for their neighbors!

Just because the western countries all hate each other’s neighbours, it’s not a valid reason to blame the eastern ones for that.

Also, hey, wasn’t that a music competition? Why should we even care about which country the winning song comes from? Shouldn’t the jury think just about the music? Please tell me more about the impartiality of the jury.

Another thing: maybe it’s just me, but I supposed everyone studied math or had a basic knowledge of how many countries are in Europe. Well, I did both for you and if we divide Europe in half, we will have more o less 21 countries on the west and 26 countries on the east (I am including Australia in the west).

In my world, 26 is a bigger number than 21. So if the east slightly wins more times than the west is, well, understandable. The probability for them to win is higher, because there are more artists from those countries and so they have more chances to bring the winning song. I don’t think it’s so difficult to understand.

Maybe the reason why the western countries win less is not because “the easterns votes for their neighbours”, but because the westerns do not take the competition seriously and send shitty songs. Why Italy rarely gets a bad position? Because we care about music and we want to send something good. Why the UK fails a lot of times? Because they don’t care enough to send a good song. They are both Big Fives and they both put money on this show: the only difference is that one cares a bit more than the other. So instead of blaming the east, maybe it’s time to start bringing more decent songs.

And this “the east wins more” is even more stupider, if you look at the countries with the highest number of victories: Ireland, Sweden, the Netherlands, the UK, Luxembourg and France.

In my world, those countries are all in the west. I know we all hate each other, but knowing when our rivals are on a map would be a good start.

Do you want to know why this stupid theory exists? It’s all because of the years without jury. It’s because in the years 2001-2008 we had this series of winners:

Estonia

Latvia

Turkey

Ukraine

Greece

Finland

Serbia

Russia

Since they are all in the east, they thought these countries were all voting for each other’s. That’s it.

I don’t know how they justified Ireland winning 3 times in a row (1992-1994) in their minds but hey, maybe that’s why I’m not a member of the EBU.

_________________________

The jury doesn’t have a favourite!

Very cute.

Do you want to know which are the countries with the most victories in the years 1997-2023? Here is a very funny list:

Israel: 2 times

1998 (no jury year) with Dana International - "Diva" (public’s favourite)

2018 (jury year) with Netta - "Toy" (public’s favourite)

Denmark: 2 times

2000 (no jury year) with Olsen Brothers - "Fly On The Wings Of Love" (public’s favourite)

2013 (jury year) with Emmelie de Forest - "Only Teardrops" (public’s favourite)

Ukraine: 3 times

2004 (no jury year) with Ruslana - "Wild Dances" (public’s favourite)

2016 (jury year) with Jamala - "1944" (not public’s favourite, but highly appreciated by the public)

2022 (jury year) with Kalush Orchestra - "Stefania" (public’s favourite)

Sweden: 4 times

1999 (no jury year) with Charlotte Nilsson - "Take Me To Your Heaven" (public’s favourite)

2012 (jury year) with Loreen - "Euphoria" (public’s favourite)

2015 (jury year) with Måns Zelmerlöw - "Heroes" (jury’s favourite)

2023 (jury year) with Loreen - "Tattoo" (jury’s favourite)

I don’t know you, but I notice two victories that made the public unhappy because both times the jury’s power overcame the public’s power. How weird it happened for the same country that won three times since the 50/50 system has been introduced.

Sure, the first victory was wanted by the public, but the other two were against the public’s will. And please allow me to repeat it again because this is what upsets me the most: both times an English pop song won instead of a song in a native language with a different musical genre.

And what makes these two victories even more undeserved, is that in general the winner has always been the public’s favourite. In 27 years the public’s favourite won 23 times and two times it was a public’s appreciated artist (Jamala, Duncan Lawrence).

The only two times public’s favourite didn’t win, it was a Swedish artist with a massive push from the jury that made it impossible to defeat it.

But hey, maybe this point is a bit unfair. After all, it’s not Sweden’s fault if they learned what the jury likes and keep sending the same kind of song to get their votes. Maybe I am just jealous: I mean, my country basically invented Eurovision and yet we’re not able to exploit this show to win all the times? Gosh, we’re useless :P

The problem is not Sweden’s cleverness. The problem is that the jury always uses the same criteria, so one country has been able to recognize and exploit them. In a democratic world with a fair competition, the organizers of said competition would say: “okay, maybe we should change the criteria all the time, so no one would be able to use them and the jury will remain impartial”. But I suppose this was a too difficult choice for the EBU.

Or maybe they just own Sweden some money, who knows. I really have no idea.

_____________________

The jury is here because otherwise people’s votes would be political!

Oh, so hilarious.

This is the list of the winning entries by jury and by the public:

Until the recent years, public and jury agreeded on the winner and when the public chose a winner, it was jury’s second choice. So if the public’s votes were political back then, the jury’s votes were political as well.

Only in the last editions jury and public started to truly diverge and unless I missed something, Israel just had a catchy song, Italy’s victory had nothing political behind, Ukraine’s victory was a massive collective justifiable effort to say “fuck you” to Russia and people just like Finland’s song more. So, again, nothing political behind.

However, there are also two very interesting cases, the only ones in which the winner was a country no one chose as favorite:

2016: public’s favourite: Russia - jury’s favourite: Australia. Winner: Ukraine

2019: public’s favourite: Norway - jury’s favourite: North Macedonia. Winner: the Netherlands

Do you want to know why the jury’s favourite of 2016 is Australia? I don’t know. What I know is that Australia joined Eurovision in 2015 and it was supposed to be just a one time thing, so they were automatically qualified for the finals. But in 2016 they joined like everyone else and had to make through the semifinals and... well, it wouldn’t be nice to send back home a country that just joined. I am not saying these two things are related, but it’s a bit of a weird coincidence, isn’t it?

Do you want to know why the jury’s favourite of 2019 is North Macedonia? I don’t know. What I know is that on June 2018 the country changed its name to the Republic of North Macedonia. And, you know, it’s nice to hear it more times, just to leave an impression on people’s minds. Again: I am not saying these two things are related, but it’s a bit of a weird coincidence, isn’t it?

Okay, let’s leave the tinfoil hat theories on the side. Do you really want to know where the “the public’s vote is too political” thing comes from? It comes from Jamala winning in 2016. Because Russia has already started with their bullshit in Crimea and Jamala’s song (despite not specifically talking about that invasion) was a reminder of that situation. And so everyone blamed the public for this victory and said that “the public was influenced by the actual political situation”. All while Jamala was second favorite of both the public AND the jury. So, again, if the public was biased, the jury is biased as well.

Actually, in her case the jury is a lot more biased than the public, because the public’s favorite was Russia! So, well, who is the political one now?

The truth is that the public is made of people and of course people will be influenced by the situation in which they live. But same goes for the jury: the jury is also influenced by the current situations, both Eurovision-related and world-related. So it’s totally unfair to blame the public for having a heart and a mind and for their will to choose a song over the other - especially when they are not influenced by the world situation (like in 2016) or when they are as it happened in 2022.

And, honestly, I’d much rather prefer people choosing a winner because of a fucking war, than a bunch of people choosing their winner for reasons that will benefit them only.

______________________

The jury is made of experts and they give their expert opinion!

Awesome. Now explain to me how can you objectively choose the best song between a pop one, a folk one, a metal one and a rock one. Tell me which universal criteria will you apply.

Voice? But each genre requires a different kind of voice. An opera singer has a powerful voice, but growl music requires a powerful voice as well - heck, it’s even more complicated than opera, so it should be more praised than that! I mean, try growling without sounding like an idiot: it’s immensely hard. How can you decide which is better in an objective way? Do you just focus on which is more difficult to perform? But then it’s unfair to the pop singers, who also have good beautiful voices. How can you objectively choose the best?

Performance? But every genre requires a specific kind of performance. You can’t put an energetic performance on a ballad or slow dancers on a rock song. If two performance are equally beautifully ftting for their music genre, how can you decide which is objectively better?

Lyrics? But not everyone knows the lyrics of all songs and some lyrics might have multiple meanings or refer to particular aspects of the country’s culture, so you might not understand how beautiful they are. How can you choice which one is better, without knowing all these details?

Overall impression of the song? That’s not even an objective criteria, try harder.

The truth is that you CANNOT choose between different songs and different genres in a universally objective way. You will always be influenced by your own preferences and musical tastes.

Do you want to know how these criteria could’ve worked? If everyone brought the same song. Then okay, you can objectively make your choice: after all, we are talking about one genre and one song. In all other cases, this criteria makes zero sense.

And before you say “the jury needs to recognize the good singers”: people have ears. If a singer is bad, people can hear it by themselves. Polish people proved very well that they can recognize a very bad singer from an extremely good one and I doubt the entire country of Poland is made of musical experts or that everyone likes dance-pop/electro-industrial music.

Same goes for all the people around the world who praised Jann and said Blanka is terrible: I doubt they are all music experts or Polish. Maybe they just have ears.

Sure, some people have better taste than others, I don’t deny that. But considering that all humans have ears and a brain, I don’t think they need someone else to tell them that yes, this thing you like is good or no, that thing you don’t like is bad. Maybe they can understand it by themselves.

And if the problem is that the public doesn’t have a taste, then give them the means to acquire said taste. Let experts give more insights about an artist: they could explain why their voices are good or bad, why their performance works or not and why the lyrics are complex or simple. Let the public take a decision, instead of treating them like toddlers who should be spoon-fed.

______________________

The importance of the public

What makes this 2023 victory so empty, is that it has nothing Eurovision stands for. It’s not the victory of an unknown, talented artist. It’s not a victory the majority wanted. It’s not a victory that sends a good message.

It’s the victory of mainstream and safety. It’s a victory that doesn’t look forward and doesn’t try anything new, because it prefers to rely on the same old stuff. It’s a victory of nostalgia, industries and brands.

And if it hurts so much, it’s not just because the public’s will has never been so blatantly clear about who they wanted to win, but also because after two years in which we had native languages and new genres on the top, we were really, really hoping for a switch towards something different.

I don’t blame the past artists for not trying more, the years were different. But we are in the 20s of the year 2000 now. We are more open to different people, genders, sexual orientations. We don’t have to play safe anymore, not in a world that is moving forward. We can have different winners, we can have different cultures and we can have different genres.

I really hope that this year will teach something, not just to us, but to the EBU and to Europe. If things will change, good. And despite my harsh words, I am okay if the jury stays: it has always been present, after all, even when pushed in the back. So if we have to keep it, let’s keep it.

But it’s time to give them less power. It’s time for a 30/70 or a 20/80 system. 50/50 is just not acceptable anymore.

Or, as the 2023 public’s winner said:

Thank you for your time and please, keep support your winners.

(Clips from THIS video)

#eurovision #eurovision 2023 #esc #esc 2023 #käärijä #this will always be his year #sorry not sorry #will I ever grow past this year?#maybe I'm almost ready to move on #maybe #just to be sure I'm not hating loreen #nor sweden as a country #just the unfairness of a system #so don't even start #we countries are all brothers and sisters and we should make fun of each other #and of ourselves

131 notes · View notes

borisbubbles · 1 year

Text

Eurovision 2023 PRESHOW - Part 6: EUROFAVE SLAUGHTER!!

Yep. Not deliberately, but that’s basically what this post will been seen as. Gotta get rid of the Good But Not Great Songs before I discuss the 10 I actually care about, and as it happens that group includes five eurofan faves :-)

Oh and while rehearsals will have started when this goes up, I will NOT be taking them into account for reviews and predictions from this point forward :-)

15. France La Zarra - Evidemment Autoqualifier

youtube

Yep, a “lowish” score for France. 🙂 (She’s fifteenth and solidly in 7.5/10 territory but w/e I know my readers) Idk, “Évidemment” kinda speaks for itself. Campy disco pop. <3 It’s OBVIOUSLY meant to entice the gays and ~La Zarra~ has done that with very little effort. I also really like it. Problem is, darlings, is that France kinda... doesn’t go anywhere? Évidemment is fully carried by La Zarra doing très dramatique things in the MV, and it is very gay, but when I have to make a fin de cuenta, there’s always ONE song I forget about and more often than not it’s this one. AND I GENUINELY REALLY LIKE FRANCE EACH TIME I HEAR THEIR SONG. It’s sooooo La Noche Es Para Mi in that regard.

Rarely is a song this enjoyable also this forgettable... which:

Odds at Eurovision - FRANCE

Controversial Hot Take ALERT!!! I think France are going to flop badly, specifically in the televote.

Songwise, Évidemment is in an awkward spot where it’s definitely good, but not the best at anything in particular. There no direct incentive to vote for France over, say, any of the other faves, unless you count La Zarra’s sharp sense of dress. The sheer lack of a strong USP is going to kill France if they’re not careful.

Now of course, staging can patch up their chances, so maybe I’m wrong and France will knock it out of the park. Thing is, based on the information I have pre-rehearsals, which is the song and the singer (no doubt La Zarra is an engaging lead but i sometimes worry for her mental integrity after her double drop out of Amsterdam and London) AND #GlutenGate), France could very well be one of this year’s token bottom five autoqualifiers.

In fact, I see NO OTHER autoqualifier in that role! Spain, Ukraine and Italy are top 10, UK close with a banger and Germany are getting their best televote result in centuries. We’re likely getting a semifinalist in last place (hi Reiley!), but the AQs often have a few near the bottom of the leaderboard.

So for the sake of argument, I’m going to just say that France flop, with the caveat that I’m happy with being proven wrong in twelve days from now. :-)

Projected placement: 17th-25th

-----------------------------------------------------------------

14. SERBIA Luke Black - “Samo mi se spava” Semi 1, slot #03

youtube

HELLO?! 👁👄👁

G A Y O V E R 🏳‍🌈

Luke is in a strange spot for me. I went into PZE rooting for him to win. Then he did and even though I was (and am) pleased with the result I am still mourning Nada and Filip Balos? Like I fucking LOOOOVED Ruta Mur and I almost instantly forgave Monika for beating her by comparison.

So, the good bits about ~Samo Mi Se Spava~. It’s really fucking funny. An ageing twink with a simpering gayvoice doing adlips and gundhams while serving Metroid and Pokémon Ruby realness. Luke whinces his little “spaaaaaaavaiiiiiiiii’s” with the same cadence and timbre as the Quagsires saying their own name in the Pokémon animé. YES, YES PLEASE!

The bad bits - NOT ENOUGH CRAYFISH!!!!

Yet, these fun bits about SNSP also kinda prevent me from ranking it higher? Maybe I’m getting old, but Novi Plan, Drugi San was a song and not an art project gone disastrously awry, and I would have cherished a real song more in the 2023 line-up. Like, I laugh (read: grin) every time I hear “Samo mi se spava” but it’s also difficult to take it seriously as an act. Right now, I’m not sure whether it’s laughing with or laughing at, ya know?

HELLO? :limpwrist: GAME OVER is forever though ♥

Odds at Eurovision - SERBIA

What if Serbia are a shock NQ? 👀

Yes, I know what you’re thinking. No way right?! There are too many obvious NQs in the first semifinal. And yet, what if Malta are good, what if Czechia are good, what if Switzerland are somehow not godawful, and suddenly it’s not looking too hot for the other fringe qualifiers.

Most people would gravitate towards Latvia dying in case of a borderline NQ glowing up, but idk. I think an ageing twink with a simpering voice would for some reason (homophobia) struggle in getting votes. Especially if their song is something you could ostentibly laugh at.

Also, Serbia are on third, which is a REALLY bad draw. What about Konstrakta who was also on third last year and almost won the televote in the semi you say? Irrelevant, i’m afraid. Konstrakta was the living embodiment of sarcasm and gave us one of the best meme choreos in Biti Zdrava. She was also the ONLY viable artistic entry in her semifinal. The only reason she didn’t win the televote outright (nb: she lost the tiebreaker to Cornelia) was because of her bad draw.

Meanwhile Luke has to compete with Croatia and Finland who are both on later, in more favourable spots. Like he’s getting the votes of Croatia and maybe Switzerland, but will that be enough by itself?

So while I don’t believe Serbia are NQ’ing, I do think they’re like barely scraping by in 9th or 10th without taking rehearsal footage into account. Which is a risky spot to be in.

If Serbia qualify, they’ll get their usual lower midtable result, with votes from their minions and nobody else. It might be an even lower finish this time around, because Croatia and Slovenia are both outplacing Serbia and twelving for each other, I think.

Qualifier Tier: C Projected placement: 9th-12th (Semi Final), 17th-22nd (Grand Final)

------------------------------

13. NORWAY Alessandra - “Queen of Kings” Semi 1, slot #01

youtube

Bliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiindsiiiiide.

Ya sorry, I quite like Norway too, but I don’t love “Queen of Kings” anymore. The window where I NEEDED to cling to Alessandra for my sanity (thanks to 2023′s VERY slow start) has finally passed and I’ve moved on to better and more wholesome songs. ☺

Not to say that “Queen of Kings” doesn’t have its charms - It IS a nice adaptation of Klara Hammarström’s “Run to the hills” - Gaymer soundtrack that outpaces its own nightcore with pseudo-fantasy thematics. 😍😍😍 With lyrics that are a JOY to misremember (”NOTHING IN THIS WOULD CAN STOP THE SPREAD OF A WITCH” 😍)

And also, MGP was bad and shaping up to be an Ulrikke coronation with her frankensteined Husavik nonsense, so I was ELATED when one of the few acts that I liked (the one I liked the least out of the three I liked, because of course) crushed the numbers on both votes. Since then, I’ve kinda outgrown Alessandra though oops. As I said, this year does two things very well: Fun lightweight uptempo pop, and rock music. Alessandra belongs to the trashier wing of the former and while that it fun and good, several others just do it a bit better.

ALSO, there are a few problems but i’ll discuss them in the:

Odds at Eurovision - NORWAY

There’s been this discourse amongst the fans whether Norway are going to come top five this year.

I am asking myself whether they’re even top ten. They probably are but I’d say lower half.

Like yeah, Alessandra is a favourite because a few idiots placed some large juicy bets on Norway, but here’s the tea guys: Alessandra isn’t that good without NRK’s precious autotune. I thought she was easily the worst of the night in Amsterdam and that has not been the only occasion where she failed several of the big important notes. Sickness, tiredness, saving her voice, the usual excuses, but Occam’s Razor states that they were bad performances, period.

Now, QoK is not a song that requires flawless vocals to be enjoyable or successful. However, the singing needs to also not be AWFUL in a detrimental way. Alessandra’s vocals have been approaching that level lately, and that leads me to believe she could be this year’s designated Fan Flop (it’s very clearly either her or La Zarra imo). if she manages to turn off juries and casuals via off-key wailing, it might be the end of the road for her.

Regardless of how well or how poorly she performs in Liverpool though, I think she’s a surefire qualifier. But the range on her final placement is massive thanks to her -let’s say- not very consisent live track record.

Qualifier Tier: A Projected placement: 3rd-8th (Semi), 7th-15th

-----------------------------------------------------------

12. SWEDEN Loreen - “Tattoo” Semi 1, slot #11

youtube

If you thought this was a place where “Tattoo” is venerated and worshipped, you must have taken a wrong turn (or not read my posts in the last 30 days lol).

And if you thought this was a place where Tattoo would rank low, you’re also wrong because I’m not an idiot lol. It’s good, I just don’t think it’s the best thing since sliced Duncan Laurence. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

God how DO we tackle a problem like Loreen, though? I think the FIRST thing is that we have to do is acknowledge. Acknowledge that she likely wins Eurovision for the second time. Acknowledge that 11 years after Euphoria, Loreen still HAS the skills, the talent, the drive to impress. Acknowledge that she’s the GOAT. Acknowledge that, despite the fact that I VERY MUCH DO NOT WANT HER TO WIN AGAIN, she provided yet another memorable entry that people will talk about in years to come. STUCK ON US LIKE A TATTOO SHE IS.

However, let’s also be honest: Tattoo’s popularity has little to do with the song, and almost everything to do with Loreen herself.

Personally, I get that because I also enjoy “Tattoo” for similar reasons. I love Loreen and I love her music. Perhaps it’s because I love Loreen’s music (including her non-ESC tracks) that I’m not that in love? Tattoo” is one of the least good tracks she’s ever released. It’s no “Euphoria”, it’s no “My heart is refushing me”, it’s no “Statements”. It’s not “Heal” or “We got the power”.

“Tattoo” is a McSong and the gays are lovin’ it, but insert any vaguely EDM/Dance song by her majesty here and the gays would STILL stan it because QUEEN LOREEN. In a sense she’s #DoingIt4TheFans/Fags and that’s very thoughtful of her, but pushing for her win for those reasons takes it a bit far, don’t you think?

Yet, this is exactly what’s going on right now.

For me the base principle for returnees is this: If you come back to the contest, be as good as you were before, or better. “Tattoo” is not better than “Euphoria” (not even REMOTELY close), ergo it should do worse. As my co-editor James pointed out, Loreen’s staging is reminiscent of a photocopier, and that’s exactly what "Tattoo” feels like - a pallid Euphoria retread, but one with a thematic difference: Euphoria was a triumph in the name of love, whereas Tattoo is funerary dirge putting the love she earned to rest. It tastes of defeat. It may be a small nuance, but it is the difference that separates goodness from greatness.

Odds at Eurovision - SWEDEN

Easy top three.

I’m tempted to say Loreen wins and idk whether it’s being gaslit by the Tattooheads, or the fact that the radio stations are ALREADY spamming Tattoo while ignoring everyone else (X__X) or my brain on copium, but good lord, the more time goes by the MORE it looks like a straight-up coronation.

I personally find that lowkey sickening because, again, this contest is very enjoyable and it doesn’t need a saviour in Loreenus Christ. Crowning Loreen while disregarding everyone else is an affront to ESC 2023, if you ask me, and regressive to the contest as a whole.

Now, realistically, If Loreen wins, it’ll probably be in a Jamala-style split. It’s not impossible that Blanca wins Jury, and Käärijâ wins Televote. It’s also conceivable that Loreen comes second in both Jury and Televote, allowing her to beat both Spain and Finland for Gold. I really comes down to how high Finland’s Televote is.

The way I see it, Liverpool 2023 is Loreen’s contest to lose. I hope she does, because I will enjoy Tattoo SIGNIFICANTLY MORE as a second or third placer, but regardless: it is Käärijä who has to catch up on her, and not the other way around in this two horse race for first place.

Qualifier Tier: A+ Projected placement: 2nd (Semi), 1st-3rd (Grand Final) (Prediction: 1st)

----------------------------

11. CZECHIA Vesna - “My sister’s Crown” Semi 1, Slot #13

youtube

From this point onwards, you can say that every entry is has been a lowkey obssession at a certain point during the season. 🙂

That said, I have a few caveats for Czech Rep’s (or should we say: Czechia’s) entry. NONE of which have to do with one of them being Russian, I don’t fucking CAAAAAAAAAAARE. I don’t CAAAARE that they’re referencing the war or singing in Ukrainian. All I care about is good music and crazy trash novelty, and Vesna frickin’ provide. “My sister’s crown” is frantic frankenstein mess, sporting FOUR languages, a random rap break and clear shift in tone between dark verses and a lighter chorus.

And yet it works really well? The studio version of “My sister’s crown” is excellent and fully explains how Vesna overwhelmingly won the vote in Czechia. Every aspect blends in well with each other, creating a song that I loooove to have on repeat.

Now, this is the studio version of course... Unfortunately for Vesna we have live performances out there, and they are... not as good. 😬

I think the fundamental problem for Vesna is that during live shows they rarely feel as a unit. It too often boils down to six women on equal footing competing against each other for attention. This + the fact that the harmonies haven’t been great lately, kinda push it out of the top 10 for me! Sorry qorls!

Odds at Eurovision - CZECHIA

Same principle as Serbia, rly. Czechia COULD be a shock NQ if Europe suddenly decide that both Malta and Latvia are worth voting for. That said, I think a Czech NQ would require more effort, specifically more effort from Vesna into becoming a messier version of Tulia. Czechia’s draw is, after all, pretty good, right between Azer and NL.

That said, because “My sister’s crown” often teeters on trainwreck territory, I’m tempted to say that Czechia aren’t going to do too well in the Grand Final. The Czechs really need to look into their staging and make Vesna feel like ONE FORCE, working with each other to get their message across. I personally would take the three ladies who don’t sing and dress them up as the men from the VC then use them as foil to the three who do provide the vocals. Anything that minimizes the clutter is a welcome addition.

if the Czech do get it all together (which I doubt because even in Amsterdam the vocals weren’t as good as they should be), they could finish somewhere left-side. It’s is just more likely that they won’t. Czechia are behind in the race, and who knows what rehearsals will bring.

Qualifier Tier: C Projected placement: 6th-11th (Semi), 11th-19th (Grand Final)

THE RANKING:

Part 1: The BAD entries (Switzerland / Croatia / Israel / Greece) Part 2: the IRRELEVANT entries (Ireland / Albania / Netherlands / San Marino) Part 3: The Borewhores (Estonia / Ukraine / Cyprus / Italy) Part 4: The Respectable Entries (That Aren’t For Me) (Georgia / Denmark / Spain / Germany / Azerbaijan) Part 5: The Mild Likes (Romania / Poland / Latvia / Armenia / Lithuania)

Next up: the lower half of my top 10 :-)