194) Glambert (or Idol's Over-Sized Closet)

Let's set aside any notions that Adam Lambert is anything but remarkably talented. When it comes to technical proficiency, there is no angle by which to level at legitimate attack on Glambert.

Artistry and technical proficiency, however, seldom go hand in hand. Otherwise, we'd all be marveling at the artistry of the likes of Thomas Kinkade. Or, to put it another way, I'm sure Anne Geddes is very good at whatever it is that Anne Geddes actually does.

The problem is that whatever Anne Geddes actually does involves dressing up babies as plants or angels or otherwise innocuous things that, when portrayed by babies, become vile, nauseating, and a good argument for voluntary blindness.

Such is the problem with Glambert, who can sing very well, but chooses instead to scream when not necessary, as, for instance, in his cover of the uncoverable (and highly personal) U2 classic "One"*.



Adam seems to be under the impression that authenticity once-removed is the same as authenticity itself; a mistake commonly made by those rooted firmly in the Broadway tradition, as Glambert is. He makes "crying face" when he wants to portray heartache. He makes "come-hither face" when he wants to portray sex appeal. He makes "screechy face" when he wants to portray rock stardom. But the fact is, he never makes "Adam face".

Glambert suffers from the same maddening problem as his equally-technically-proficient counterpart, David Archuleta, who was equally difficult to watch last season. Archuleta was repressing something, but it's not entirely clear what, as he was too young to really pin down. It was sad to see such talent go to so many aimless, disengenuous places, but such is the lot of someone so mired in the expectations of others. Or, in other words, Archuleta's problems were his dad's fault. Adam's are largely Idol's.

Because, for all its wink-wink banter between its two (let's face it) aggressively straight male stars, Ryan Seacrest and Simon Cowell, Idol is shamefully closeted, unwilling to emerge as a really positive and transformative voice in the struggle for civil rights for gay Americans. If Idol came out (and allowed Glambert to do the same), the reasoning seems to be, then it would shatter the illusions of countless millions of tween girls who don't know he's not really into them. In the meantime, it plays on the popular support of the same group, all the while scoring points from a huge audience of gay men and women who a) also love Glambert and b) the show shamefully refuses to acknowledge.


Ooooh...Are they or aren't they?!!!! They aren't

As such, we have already been subjected to the post-Idol carnival that has been the life of Clay Aiken, whose handlers tried to maintain his gay fanbase without betraying his "Christian" fanbase, all the while ducking an opportunity to unite those two groups, and in so doing driving the wedge between them even further. And the real victim, of course, was Aiken, who had to live in needless and publically-scrutinized denial for years before acknowleding who he his, long after creating a safe distance between himself and Idol.


They are

I don't know what Idol plans to do with Glambert, but I don't want to see him suffer Aiken's fate. I'd rather his technical proficiency be chanelled into something productive. But I can't help but think that his inability to really, genuinely connect to a song (except, not so surprisingly, Tears for Fears' "Mad World") is largely the fault of Idol's insistence on maintaining the status quo while posturing as though it were living on the edge.

If Glambert wants to have a career, he has to forgo what Idol wants to sell him as and wants him to be, which is to say Idol's definition of a rock star (all sex appeal and testosterone, or, in other words, Chris Daughtry), and start being who he is, which is to say Freddie Mercury's version of a rock star.

Mercury was every bit as talented and every bit as gay as Lambert, but he was, even at his most flamboyant and loony, always believable. His sexuality never made him less of rock star. Idol needs to learn that lesson, because they're not doing us, themselves, or least of all Adam Lambert any favors.

It's possible Glambert could be, as Paula loves to strung-outedly blabber, "a true artist".

But the truth needs to come first if the artist is ever going to follow.

*And yes, we're aware of the very competent Mary J. Blige version and, yes, aware Bono participated and, yes, still think the song can't be replicated in any meaningful way