Let me start this piece by telling everyone that, yes, I believe it's downright snobbish—not to mention a clear display of limited vocabulary—to dismiss other people's work as "trash."
That's your review? That's a critique?
How high and mighty can you get? So, you're the repository of everything precious? Wait, did you even earn your role as judge and jury? If so, why is your language so common it could've come straight off the streets?
THE BACKGROUND: "TRASH"
Socialite Tessa Prieto is facing criticism today for her harsh critique of ØV CÜNT, a contestant from Drag Race Philippines Season 2.
ØV CÜNT—known for embracing an edgy and spooky drag aesthetic—competed against fellow aspiring Drag Race Philippines' star Matilduh in the show's third episode, a design challenge centering around a Halloween theme.
While deliberating with the contestants, Tessa glibly voiced her dislike for ØV's design, sparking controversy and eventually drawing attention less to the design and more to herself.
Her remarks on ØV's design output: "Can I say it? This is trash... But only because it's Halloween. Pero parang kulang ng spooky. Also, when I spoke to you, you had other ideas. From that time that I saw you, I'm seeing the same thing."
Tessa's kind of thrashing isn't even original. This isn't the first time a drag queen's work in the reality competition has been put down as "trash."
In Season 1's 7th episode, finalist Eva Le Queen had to stand there and take the same thrashing during her own design challenge, this time from fashion designer Rajo Laurel.
In his remarks, Rajo described Eva's DIY bodysuit as "crafty," before saying it was actually "ugly" and an "atrocity," until finally labelling it "trash."
Rajo told Eva: "Because we are in this level of competition, it's a little bit crafty. And it's sort of, like, going into that mortal sin of the DIY part of the competition, 'cause it is something that you glued on to a body suit. And that, for me, is a mortal sin.
"What saved you perhaps is your presentation in your luxury department. 'Cause it was funny, the cheque, the story... It made me laugh, it made me forget this atrocity that is before me."
Before the design challenge, Eva and other contestants had participated in a runway competition with a luxury theme.
Continuing his critique, Rajo added: "Because that, if you look around you, that's ugly. And I'm being fierce because I know you can do better. And I'm being hard because I have seen what you can do. And this is trash."
Tessa's own "trash" comment left me particularly upset, given that Eva Le Queen revealed that the socialite was present during Eva's reconciliatory dinner with Rajo.
Tessa already knew the history between them and the negative response Rajo had received for that comment.
IT'S RUDE AND It'S NOT HELPING
To repeat my first point: Dissing someone's earnest work—or, worse, someone—as "trash" following a creation that a person invested great effort in is a sign that the persons talking "trash" are closet snobs and so wanting in vocabulary, they end up sounding the same and really rude.
First, the rudeness doesn't help because it doesn't explain how someone can get better.
Feedback that gives the whys and hows and feedback prodding a person to do better are what create an environment for learning.
Even if Tessa says it's for TV soundbites and shifts the blame on TV editing, the comment was hers.
Also, was her need to stay on the show so great she had to play by those rules?
Whether it's an industry expert on a judging panel or a critic in a position of authority, the expectation is for judges to ultimately provide support, not for them to leave contestants feeling low and lost.
I must commend Rajo for having adjusted his style since. He is now more considerate when delivering his reviews and actually provides concrete suggestions for design improvement.
Second, sweeping comments that are unkind and thoughtless discourage people from giving the work another try.
People forget that using harsh language can so demoralize others, it deters them from pursuing their creative life further. It stops them from finding out just what they're made of and exactly what brilliance may lie beneath.
THINK BEFORE YOU SPEAK
Seeing Eva Le Queen and ØV break down because of the "trash" remark jogged my memory.
I've been through this. A careless, harsh comment thrown my way made me question my worth, leading to a lot of anxiety on my end while the person who dropped the careless, harsh comment just went cluelessly away.
It's an experience I wouldn't wish others to go through.
Words hold immense power—they can harm someone's mind permanently and dismantle his person.
JUDGES SHOULD BE BETTER PEOPLE
This admonition applies even to those judging contests.
Certainly, they're expected to give solid, frank assessment of the work before them. Judging is, after all, not a job for those who value being popular. Judges are expected to tell it as it is. This is the way to make a transference of skill and knowledge between judge and contestant happen.
All the same, the big presumption here is that the judges are more learned, they've seen more, done more, and they've been chosen because they have the expansiveness and the smarts to be able to mentor.
They are also, not incidentally, expected to have the articulation.
Surely, "trash" as a word is too pedestrian, too facile, for use in a critique. Only extraordinary—read: revolting—circumstances would merit its use.
Drag Race Philippines does not seem to fall under extraordinary or revolting. It's a reality show, it's entertainment, it's discovery. It's a show that brings learning to exaggerated levels of fun, turning the whole journey into an exciting game.
Unless, of course, the show's judges don't have the vocabulary for what they need to say?
If the judges cannot articulate the dynamics of design violated by contestants, if they cannot explain the desired match between theme and creation, if they cannot find the language to express what individual creativity demands—then, yeah, I suppose they can descend to using the easy "trash."
READ MORE:
