Sarah Boyle Victim of Retard?

Figure 1AP Photo/Andrew Milligan/PA

 

Civilization is not always what it is cracked up to be. We pride ourselves in being at a sophisticated peak in the evolution of our collective maturity level, what with rising above the need for inhumane things like torture and all. But I believe the Susan Boyle episode exposes our collective humanity for what it really is-drenched with human nature's preoccupation with ego. It is that innate need to feel good about ourselves that drives us to continually find ways to set ourselves apart from one another. We may think we are getting close to obliterating prejudice but actually we are just more creative about fooling ourselves into thinking that our judgments are not about plain old disdain for people who are not like us.

The name of the show, Britain's Got Talent, a sister to the American Idol program, supposes a mission of finding raw talent that can be exploited as an entertainment career as opposed to being simply lost amongst the maddening crowd of the masses. But, as the name of the show implies, there is a difference between talent and skill. This year's British version apparently pitted talent against skill in its final round. In doing so it seems to have failed to distinguish between these two attributes and the public awarded the prize to skill in contravention of the very name of the competition. The winner was a dance troupe that performed an intricate set of timed moves. No doubt this was quite an accomplishment, but the act is the product of serious work and training on the part of the dancers who have honed a complex physical and mental skill. Indeed, while the choreographer may have tremendous talent, the troupe itself had tremendous skill. At best it is unclear whether the choreography is the focus of the achievement on the show. Susan Boyle on the other hand is the epitome of "talent" in that her innate singing ability is a gift that sets her apart from singers in general.

So how to explain why Susan did not win? Simple. Susan was deprived of oxygen at birth. In short, she is a retard. Having been "slow" all her life, she devoted herself to the menial task of "caring for" her parents. As poor people, lacking the resources to provide any educational opportunities to lift their infirm child higher given her limitations, they apparently settled for making her the scullery maid. While great for the family unit, which no doubt exuded tremendous love and true devotion, this did nothing for Susan's life after her parents are out of the picture.

People do not like retards. Much as we hate to admit it, as a group humans feel safe in expressing their gratitude that they are not like that. To face the fact that her singing talent could trump the lack of development of her other skills is just too tough to overcome. Even in that 1980's TV show Life Goes On about the family with the Down Syndrome child, dubbed the most heartwarming show ever, by the second season that kid's stories were taking a back seat to those of the normal members of the family. In the ensuing 20 years nary another show with a character like this has been seen.

My friend Cassie Sims pointed out that this phenomenon was very succinctly summarized in a scene from the Ben Stiller movie Tropic Thunder called Never Go Full Retard. The Robert Downey, Jr. character explains that as an actor the impaired character always needs a redeeming quality, like Dustin Hoffman's autistic Rain Man and Tom Hanks athletic Forrest Gump. These fellows both won Oscars for their portrayal but poor Sean Penn who went all the way with Sam was overlooked. Here is the link so you can watch it yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffEdO-UG4ZU

 

I guess that when they get around to making the Susan Boyle movie, whoever portrays her has a better chance at winning the big prize than she did in her own competition. She does indeed have talent, notwithstanding what those dopey voters said. I guess you just can't change people. Sad.