JennaZ

Yeah, I think "cred" is all relative. A lot of popular artists never have "cred" among critics. Sometimes, just the fact that an artist is popular makes them "commercial" and therefore "uncool" among those with "artistic" pretensions. FullyFunctional, Couchie -- you make some strong points about the bullies who expose people's public lives. It's bad enough to malign people known by their board names. However, IMHO, exposing their personal lives goes way over the line. I'm with you on this: I'm glad there seems to be some attempt at civility, at least for now. I'm not saying it should be free of debate. I just think that a board associated directly with Clay should be a welcoming place.

Kelly is young, but I think, smarter than people give her credit for. She seems perfectly aware that this album may not sell what the last one did, but it seems to be the kind of music she wants to do. She's made plenty of money, so she may not feel particularly driven to make the most commercial album possible. It may turn out to be a mistake, but she seems to know what the risks are. Absolutely. Debate is most civil when there is a "agree to disagree" mentality. Unfortunately, many are so deeply invested in their positions that they forget that no one is going to "win" the argument. Sometimes, you just have to let it go and accept the fact that others share different opinions. As for fan input, I think Clay does read the boards, but not as frequently or extensively as many fans think he does. Some things impact what he does. Some things don't. It's not a bad idea to see what fans think, but he has a better understanding of the realities of his own situation, and he has his own emotional, artistic, and business needs. I don't think anyone should become a slave to their fan demands. I once read an interview with Joss Whedon, the creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. He compared the message board fans to "your big, drunk best friend." It made a lot of sense. They know a lot about you. They care about you. They can be very helpful and invaluable. But they can also hurt you with their unthinkingly brutal honesty, because they don't really know you, and they can do act in ways that are hard to control. So true, fullyfunctional. It's very easy to lose perspective when one focuses too closely on the negative. Yes, there is a lot of evil in the world. However, there's also a lot of goodness and joy. I wish more people allowed themselves to experience it.

Great point, Ansamcw. And like lightmyfire, I also believe that money can't buy everything. There seems to be this widespread relief that any song can become a hit if enough money is committed to it. Payments might help increase exposure, but at some point, songs have to sell themselves. "Never Again," quite frankly, is just not a very catchy song. Yes, it's interesting, Puddins, that K-Lo gets airplay but doesn't sell huge numbers.

I've always had the impression that Kelly wanted to be more of a rocker than a pop singer. She seems prepared to accept the consequences of a less commercial direction, but I can see why her label might be less thrilled. If "Never Again" is representative of the album as a whole, their concern doesn't surprise me. I think Kelly has the voice to have a long career if she makes the right choices. However, whether rock is it remains to be seen, IMHO. Carrie also has a decent voice and a much improved stage presence. I've met her in a professional context, and I found her surprisingly down-to-earth and quite genuine. However, I think she is another whose success will depend on good material, which she had on her first album. She's a pretty girl who can sing, but those types of girls come up frequently in country. I like Carrie as a person, but as a performer, I don't think she's exceptionally unique. I'd wait to see her next album before laying bets on her longevity. But what I say of both of them is true of most artists. I don't think either is guaranteed a long career. I'm not sure Clay is, either. They all certainly have talent, but often, that's not quite enough. Cindilu, maybe Kelly's fight-with-the-label story is true, but over-emphasized and over-publicized. It could be that her management thought it was a way to enhance her credibility as an artist and make the album seem more sincere. However, it may not be a good fit with her established image.

On the whole, I was pleased with final selection of finalists. It was great to see Hok there, and I liked seeing Lacey there as well. It was interesting that siblings of Benji, Stanislaus, and Travis all made the final cut. I know that's raised some eyebrows, but I've heard the dance world really is much smaller than most imagine. It will be interesting to see whether their family relationships have any effect on fan support. Of course, the competition is really just beginning. Anything can happen over the course of the show, depending on how well the contestants perform within the format. There are some amazing modern dancers like Danny and Ricky, but how would they interract with, say, a hip-hop dancer or a latin specialist? Some dancers are exceptionally skilled in their genre, but weak in others. And there are a lot of people who may be perfectly good performers but who, for some reason, are forgettable in a crowd. The first to be eliminated are not often the worst ones. They're the ones people just don't remember. I can't wait to see how they pair them all.

My mistake. She was followed by the press, though. It must have been another "American actress" who felt envious that Clay could walk around the city. It's interesting, though, to see who attracts attention and who does not. Sometimes, it's a question of appearance. Some celebrities can pass unnoticed when they are not "glammed up." Reportedly, when Jennifer Lopez was filming "Maid in Manhattan," she wore her maid costume out in the streets and no one noticed her at all. Some people can look markedly different without make-up. Location does make a difference. I've heard that some British celebrities love coming to America because they can walk the streets freely. Of course, that can be an inconvenience. Supposedly, Posh Beckham threw a fit in a Beverly Hills store that refused to close down to cater to her exclusively. They were like, "Who are you?" The Beckhams are huge in Europe, but many Americans are still unaware of their celebrity. OT: So it seems Paris has been ordered back to jail.

Fantastic post, keepingfaith! It was great to read the perspective of someone who fell in love with him at the AI5 finale. And Clay's blog was highly satisfying, for many reasons. Between the OFC message board and more frequent blogs from him, I'll take his blog any time. I can imagine how frustrating it must be to read all this fan speculation that he knows is completely wrong. It must be even more exasperating to see that no matter what he says, and no matter how explicitly he says it, some will not believe him. However, he handled it well on his blog, with a friendly, positive tone and a simple, easy grace. Clay in Paris. Two of my favorite things, together at last! I'm glad he had the opportunity to explore the city unnoticed. I'll admit, I've longed for him to be the kind of superstar who creates a stir wherever he goes. I still want that for him, really. However, for now, maybe it's not such a bad thing for him to be able to experience life in a less media-intensive way. One day, that could change, and the paparazzi could make it as impossible for him to wander any international street. But he'll always be able to look back and think, "In 2007, I saw the Paris of bridges, sidewalks, and parks. I got to really know the city, to see it as it is, without my celebrity affecting things around me." All Cameron Diaz probably saw were the insides of hotel rooms and the crush of press around her. Claytonfan, laughn, Totally, LovesClaysVoice, lightmyfire, it's good to see you all posting. Keep it coming!

Loved this! Thanks! Thanks for the synopsis, KAndre. This is so sad it's almost funny. How pathetic is it that such a small thing can blow up into World War III. But even in this recap, you can sense the dueling agendas.

While it is a bit embarrassing that the OFC board was shut down, it wouldn't be the first time a celebrity has shut down a fan board. I'm rather relieved, in a way. It wasn't a great representation of the fandom, but it was probably the one that many newer or less internet intensive fans came across. I was always irked that one of the least pleasant boards was one officially associated with him. No doubt, there may be bad blogs, but those are much easier to avoid. Nasty comments to blogs could be monitored, but because of the format, distasteful entries are quickly displaced. BTW - Welcome, all you former lurkers!

Favorite TV Clack? I happen to love his second Kimmel appearance. That Primetime interview was also very special. I don't belong to a private board, but I can't say the existence of them bothers me. While there may be some that can get mean, the fact is that people talk about other people off the boards all the time. I can also understand the desire to have a place to discuss things away from the general public. It may be easier (and safer) to talk about one's personal life with a very limited number of trusted individuals. Certain statements or opinions can be misinterpreted in a broader environment. Then, there's the very real fact that there are some terrible non-fans out there who do read the boards and use the content against Clay. There are things that could be discussed among fans but that would ideally be hidden from the worst of the haters. The open boards are fun, and it's good to have a broad range of participants. However, while the private boards may not always be well-behaved, I don't think the mere fact of their privacy makes them wrong.

RE: Fan criticism. Every passionate fan base goes over-the-top. Sports fans rant endlessly about owner or coaching choices. TV show fan boards can go ballistic over plot or character developments. It's funny. You look at other active boards on any subject, and you tend to see the same situation played out. Posts bitching and moaning, and posts stating "Well if you hate X so much, why are you posting on this message board?" Case in point: The message board for the TLC Show, "Little People, Big World." The message board is full of posts about how the family's house is too messy, how the kids are brats, how the father is cruel. And then, there are posts saying, "Well, if you hate the show so much, why are you still watching?" Some champion the right to criticize, sneering at the "self-appointed defenders," while others bemoan the negativity and plead for more positive, less judgemental posts. I'll admit, on Clay boards, when the negative outweighs the positive, I tend to stay away. I do agree that some fans make very unfair, even offensive comments about Clay. In an ideal world, I'd hope that all comments about him on fan boards were respectful, even if they weren't always supportive or complimentary. However, I've kind of resigned myself to the idea that may not be possible on the bigger boards, perhaps because I've come to realize that there may be different types of personalities involved. Like you, KAndre, I'm not good at listening to people vent. I just don't enjoy listening to complaints. However, I realize that that's really my issue more than a fandom issue. YSRN put it well:

Clay may have something to celebrate. From TVGuide.com: Exclusive: Jericho on Verge of Renewal

LOL. I'm with you on this one, cindilu2.

I do think those were flash forwards. The "golden ticket" confirmed it for me, as did the "we were never meant to leave" speech. My theory: I suspect person who died was Ben. Remember, at the funeral parlor, the person asked, "Friends or family?" and Jack said "neither." Kate said later, "Why would I go to the funeral?" This was not a loved individual. Why would this death destroy Jack? Because Jack desperately wants to go back to the island (that's why he's been getting on planes, hoping for them to crash), and he may have thought that Ben would have been the one person who could find the way back. It's interesting how they intercut the scenes of Jack on the island with Jack off the island. On the island, he is a leader--strong, respected, and valued. Off the island, he has become a shaggy, addicted mess. (Although interestingly, even at his worst, he still has the heroic impulse.) Ben even told him something like, "Why would you want to go back? You're father's dead. Your wife's left you." It's as if Jack is a better person on the island than he would be if he left. Which is what Locke seems to have understood instinctively, and why he is so desperate to stay. He certainly seems to have had a better life on the island. In a way, many of the other characters have also had better lives there. Michael bonded with Walt. Sun and Jin reignited their marriage. Charlie overcame his drug addiction. Rose seems to have been cured of cancer. Even Sawyer seems to have become a less angry, more altruistic human being. And perhaps this is why Ben feels that rescue is not in anyone's best interest, and why he's willing to kill and lie to keep the island from being discovered. I'm not sure what to make of this "flash forward" development. It's hard for me to believe that the show will completely leave the island, but who knows? Maybe the show will follow their lives off the island, but will feature flashbacks of their life on the island, and deal with an attempt to return to it. Maybe the "flash forward" is something else entirely (a dream? a delusion? a cautionary vision?). The fact that his father is referred to in the present tense certainly makes it seem as if this may not be precisely what we think it is. Amazing episode, though. It was wonderful to see Hurley come to the rescue in the VW bus! Rousseau got to meet her daughter. Jack got to beat up Ben. And though Charlie died, he did it with a lot of grace and dignity. Just wish we didn't have to wait until January for the new season! ETA: A random thought... What if only some of the Losties get rescued--the ones with Jack? Locke, Sawyer, Sayid, Bernard, Jin, Hurley, Desmond and Juliet are not with them when the transmission goes through. Enough for a series?

Does Charlie have to die? I'm not so sure. Desmond seemed to imply that he needed to flip the switch for them to be rescued. However, there are still several seasons to go. Although so much seems to be leading up to his death, I can't help but think that what actually happens will be entirely unexpected. The telescoping is so obvious that it almost feels like a deliberate misdirect on the part of the producers. I think major characters will die, but in a stunningly unexpected way.

The pre-Kimmel party was awesome! I was there, and I can attest that Artquest is a wonderful hostess and a very lovely person. I sometimes feel a little awkward at Clay parties. For one, I tend to be a bit younger than most at these events. Second, so many seem to already know each other so well. There's so much history and shared experience that I'm only glimpsing from the outside, and I don't always know how to break into the conversations of strangers. However, at her party, Artquest was very sweet to introduce me to her other guests, for which I was quite greatful. To be honest, I was quite nervous when I first got there (like a geeky new kid approaching the popular kids' table), but she did a lot to make me feel at ease. Does my board personna match my real life personality? It's hard to say. For some reason, people are often a bit surprised when they meet me in person. I'm probably more opinionated online than I am real life, where I can be rather quiet and boring with people I don't know. However, once the ice is broken, I can get rather gabby.

Terrific posts. I feel the same way. There was a time when I expected him to go supernova. And when he got the Rolling Stone cover, the fantastic first week sales, and the great concert response, it all seemed predestined. However, things haven't been as easy as one would have hoped--which is normal--but for fans, perhaps a bit dispiriting given previous expectations. I've begun to suspect, however, that his choices (Christmas concerts, "oldies" reviews, orchestras, etc.) are those of someone who is not aiming for the broadest, mainstream pop/rock market. This seems to be the kind of music he wants to do, which may not necessarily bring him the kind of high profile success of Kelly or Carrie. And I can live with that, because I still enjoy it. But there seems to be a segment of the fandom that simply cannot accept the possibility that he might actually choose a less commercial path. I have contemplated the same thing many a time. Sometimes, I ask myself, "Is it all worth it?" But when there is joy in the fandom, it is great to be able to celebrate with others who truly understand it. I do find myself drawn back, but there are moments when I just can't deal with it. I have seen a bit of this in action. At a LA CD release party, Michael Orland and Fred Bronson were guests. Both were gracious enough to answer questions, but to me, it seemed that some fans started to press them in a slightly accusatory manner, with Michael being held to answer for American Idol, and Fred for the record industry as a whole. I felt bad for them being put on the defensive, and I wouldn't have blamed them for walking out, or at least, for never appearing at a Clay event again. I do sometimes worry that many ("insiders," industry people, etc.) may be turned off by the often demanding and unreasonable nature of some fans. This is very true, and quite frankly, a sign that many have lost perspective. This notion that corporations conspire to orchestrate his downfall is absurd, and is based in the fantasy that Clay is such a towering figure that he represents a real threat to many. Not true. He just isn't to everyone's taste. While I've no doubt that there are genuine "haters" out there, I think to many, he's just an easy target, like so many other celebrities out there. So true, Couchie. For every celebrity, popularity waxes and wanes. Yes, after Idol, Clay was white hot. But time passed, and it's not unreasonable to believe that he may not be as in-demand as he once was. Actually, considering his lack of radio hits, his current ability to book talk shows and concert venues is actually quite impressive. However, I do think that many fans overestimate his status in the industry. So true. I think it's very possible to learn an awful lot through the internet. However, I also believe that it's dangerous to assume that what one learns on the internet represents the full range of knowledge out there. Even occasional correspondence with industry people gives only a limited perspective. Agreed. Did people expect RCA to only hire fans? In a way, it was a plus that they chose a young female and not some grizzled, cynical man.

Lots to chew on in this episode, huh? My theory is that the island does have very unusual and unique properties (which the Asian Dharma guy even says in one of Ben's flashbacks). I think that people have landed there for a long time (witness the wrecked ship where Locke's father was killed), but that something about the island tends to cause the death of most, if not all who end up there. Personally, I don't think it's so much the physical dangers (deadly spiders, smoke monsters, etc.), but a psychological danger that causes normal, reasonable people to eventually become destructive. My guess is that most groups who have landed there end up destroying themselves, if they are not destroyed by others. I do think the "hostiles" are residents who where there before Dharma. I'm not sure they were necessarily a "native," self-populating community, just one that had been there before Dharma. I think they attacked Dharma for their comfortable compound and a consistent influx of supplies, although some effect of the island may have initiated the envy and impulse. My suspicion, though, is that they needed an insider to effectively eradicate them, and that Ben organized the gassing (using Dharma cannisters). The "hostiles" then took over, continuing to enjoy the supplies and benefits of Dharma. However, to do so, they needed to sustain the illusion that they were Dharma, and to do that, they needed a knowledge of how things worked. I think Ben leveraged his knowlege into a position of authority. It's also possible that as women were not able to conceive and deliver to term on the island, he told them he was born on the island to develop this idea that he has a relationship to it. Yeah, that does seem to be the case. There seems to be a power struggle going on, as his hold over them no longer appears to be as strong as it once was. Perhaps the loss of the communication system and the destruction of the submarine has begun to begun to make them believe that they are no longer going to get any outside support, and if so, they don't need Ben. His condition has also made him physically weaker, which may have diminished him in their eyes. Along comes Locke, a man with strong survival skills and a seemingly powerful relationship to the island. His only flaw was that he didn't seem to have the capability to kill someone. Ben attempted to demonstrate that, but with Richard's help, Locke found a way to make it appear as if he had. The hostiles' lack of interference in the fight suggests that many may have begun to respect him, which Ben had to see as a threat. He thus takes him "to see Jacob" so that he can say that Jacob killed him. When his daughter says, "You're seeing Jacob. Bring this (the gun)," perhaps she did so, not because she believed in the threat of Jacob, but because she suspected her father's real motives. Is Jacob real? That's an interesting question. Part of me thinks that Jacob is merely a manifestation of Ben's mind. I suspect that the island makes people see things which may not actually exist, and Jacob (like Ben's mother and Jack's dad), may be a sort of hallucination. Part of me thinks that Jacob is some kind of invisible entity that took real action. Ansa, your spirit theory is an intriguing one. Part of me wonders, though, if Ben manufactured the confrontation to scare Locke. However, Locke actually heard something speak, something Ben did not seem to anticipate. It may not be "Jacob" but something else entirely, some other weird effect of the island. I still tend to believe that the Losties were brought to the island deliberately and for study by others. Those others may be the original, outside funders of Dharma who may still believe that a Dharma community exists on the island. Or it may be by a newer group which may even be using Ben and company to further their agenda--the study and exploitation of the island's powers. Someone in my office told me that when the Russian came to the camp, he said something like, "Fortunately, it wasn't set on Lethal." Basically, that he was actually only stunned by the perimeter fence, not killed.

Interesting interview with the creators of Lost here. Excerpt:

My best seats were second row at an LA Christmas concert. I had to organize a membership to get them, and while it was lovely to be close, it was a lot of stress to get it together. (If people didn't pay because they didn't like the seats, I would have been liable for twelve tickets.) Luckily, that didn't happen, but I'm not sure I want to go through that again. Most fun tickets were 11th row at the LA Independent Tour. These were the best I ever got for a pop tour. I was pretty close at the Kimmel mini-concert, though, which was a similar experience. While it is wonderful to be close, for me, it's not an absolute imperative. I can't do a lot of concert travelling, so if there's a concert near me, I'm going to go, wherever the seats are. I may look wistfully at the front rows, but I'm not willing to go to extreme lengths to get them (brokers, memberships, multiple buys, etc.) I'm just grateful that there are tours. Justin Guarini's not touring. Diana DeGarmo isn't touring. Bo Bice toured, but not to the extent Clay has been able to in the two years since he left Idol. I think we're actually very lucky, as far as fans go. Things could be so much worse.

I agree. I remember hearing that most mystery stories are written backwards. That is to say, that you start with the ending so that everything can lead up to it logically. I suspect the creators have always known what their "end" was, but that they just weren't sure how long their middle should be. Now they know, so hopefully, the result will be tighter, more focused plotting. Of course, three seasons is still a long time.

Looks like Lost has the end in sight, which is actually what producers have wanted. Full article here.

I think they do have files on every single passenger. So far, The Others seem to know an awful lot about them individually. I didn't notice whether the parachute girl was the one Locked helped, but if so, it certainly would suggest that she is not who she appears to be. Of all the photos she could have of Desmond, the one she has happened to be a copy of the same one Desmond has with him. The Others used Nathan to infiltrate the passengers before. I could see them trying it again. Juliet is there, but they had to know that many would not trust her. Someone else, someone who seemed to come from outside the island may be more credible, especially if she could gain the support of someone like Desmond. The Purgatory theory is a popular one, and it can accommodate the whole range of strange and mystical situations that have arisen on the island. Here's a theory: Suppose this is all a sort of grand experiment designed to test human interraction, not so much with other humans, but with the island itself. What if the Dharma Initiative was the first to attempt to exploit the island's powers, but the effects of the island lead to the destruction of most participants? Ben may have been the offspring of the survivors, and the primary bridge to a second group, "The Others," who are attempting to do what Dharma could not--understand and control the island's powers. If someone could find a way to harness the island's powers and export them, the effect on humanity could be huge. There seem to be regenerative powers, fertility powers, electromagnetic powers, and perhaps others, such as hallucinatory powers and "smoke monsters." "The Others" may be voluntary participants in the testing, but what if it was felt that to truly understand the island, they needed people who were unaware of its effects? So this very well-funded group decide to arrange for a planeload of test subjects to arrive. Maybe they choose an ethnically diverse group of people to test the effects on different races. Maybe they select a brother and sister so they can test the effects on people with similar genetic material. And maybe they choose people with issues in their background so they can watch how the island affects their behavior and motivation. Could the island, for example, cause someone who has never killed before, one of "the good ones," to (i.e. John Locke) commit murder? They may feel that their methods are justified, because the power of the island could be seen to benefit humanity as a whole. However, isolated, they've lost their sense of perspective. I don't know. Just an idea. I read another interesting theory that the Losties are all actually clones of the original passengers.

Last night's episode was pretty mindblowing. I had expected Locke's dad to be the same guy who destroyed Sawyer's life. It was known that he had been a con man, and as Sawyer's enemy was one, it seemed only fitting within the show's universe that they'd be the same person. Still, it was intriguing that The Others, particularly Ben, felt that he had to be killed. Why? Just to make Locke into a better man? And as he actually had Sawyer do it, what effect would that have on his standing? Locke's father seemed to believe he was in hell. Perhaps that is why he seemed so oblivious to the threat of death. However, can someone in hell or Purgatory actually be killed if they are already dead? I tend to think that he was lead to believe he was dead, but that he was actually alive. ldyjocelyn, you're right in that the creator has stated before that the show does NOT take place in purgatory. It is possible that he was bluffing, but somehow, I suspect that the truth is not that simple. The show is presenting this possibility that the plane was found with all on board dead. It's an intriguing notion, but it is worth noting that we really only know this from two sources: the parachute woman and Locke's father. Perhaps either or both have been manipulated into believing or saying that. Maybe parachute woman is actually working for The Others. When Kate told Jack and Juliet about her, Juliet didn't seem hopeful or stunned. What she said was, "We should tell her (Kate)." Tell her what? That the woman can't be who they think she is? That rescue is impossible? Hmm... To me, the fact that The Others manipulate Locke/Sawyer into killing a man casts them into a far more sinister role than ever before. They've abducted people. They've tortured people. They forced Michael to kill Ana Lucia to get back Walt. However, to try to force an inherently gentle man to kill purely for revenge seems even crueler. I wasn't happy that Sawyer killed Locke's father. It's not that the man didn't deserve it. It's that I do believe that killing someone, even a bastard, takes a toll on a person. Sawyer didn't seem happy that he had done it, even though he had wanted to do so for a long time. To me, it's almost as if The Others are testing the Losties to see what they can make them do. I'm glad the show is packing more story development into these episodes. From the preview, it seems as though the next few episodes will be fascinating. BTW: There are spoilers in this article at Mediaweek.

It's a difficult balance. On one hand, like ldyjocelyn, I feel that some sense of mystery is still important to the series. Personally, I don't want an explicit and complete explanation until the final episode, because part of what makes it fascinating are the multitude of possibilities. Is there a purely scientific explanation, or are there mystical elements involved? Are these people real, clones, or merely figments of someone's delusion or dream? On the other hand, I think that there have been times when the show failed to reveal enough, or to progress enough, to keep viewer interest. I do believe that the show's creator now has a better sense of where he wants to go with this series, which is why I think the story arcs are beginning to unfold more quickly. I drifted away from Lost for a while, but I'm finding it much more absorbing now that they've abandoned the "tailies" and focused on the original characters.