Watching the F1 race last Sunday, I actually found it 'boring', as Vettel had been leading right from the beginning and his victory was pretty much predictable. This brought me to question how the predictability of a winner affects the outcome of the prize. Do underdogs ever win?
How do people 'predict' a winner?
Street: ".... the way the prize is 'branded' to promote the interests of those who create it."
In the case of Hairspray, it was almost inevitable that Amber would be the winner of Miss Teenage Hairspray based solely on the amount of airtime that she has as compared to others on 'The Corny Collins Show'. Her mother, having a hand in the production of the show would naturally be biased toward her own daughter and play a part in making sure that Amber won the contest.
I would consider Little Inez as the underdog in the Miss Teenage Hairspray contest as seen in the way she was never predicted to win. It was interesting to see how Little Inez winning the contest actually changed the cultural dynamics and was symbolic in the breaking down of white supremacy.
This is congruent with Street's portrayal of how a prize is shaped by what is valued in the society, as illustrated in the brief history of the arts prize.
No comments:
Post a Comment