Monday, September 07, 2009

Miss Singapore World's journey of public criticism

When I heard about the controversy surrounding her language skills, I was harshly critical on her like most people. After having read the feature on her, I am more sympathetic and less subjective.

She is pretty and sweet-looking, with the help of expertly applied makeup, and this is most apparent at the moment she was crowned. Her smile lighted up her face and complemented her makeup. Her pronunciation leaves much to be desired when one views the videos on her interviews, but to be fair, I doubt I can accurately answer the question on South African influence too.

She is a first-year student in the fields of hospitality, travel and tourism. With that level of English, she definitely won't get anywhere far, but according to her, she is aware of her low standards and is trying to improve on them. Her methods are realistic as she prepares to represent our country. I suggest though that she can also watch more documentaries and listen to the narrators. Perhaps this pageant was a first step to her realization, albeit a hard one.

Ms Carter gave a good refute to all the criticism surrounding this issue. Vocal trainers can volunteer their services for free, or generous members of the public can sponsor her for such training. After all, she is representing our country. Instead of merely criticising her and expecting her to find her own resources, they can help and support her in this area. This may increase her placing in the competition. You just never know. Singapore has never done very well in international competitions, except for our Miss Universe representatives in the top 15: Kathie Lee in 1983 and Marion Teo in 1987. If we do this, she and our future representatives may prove us wrong.

Ms Carter also gave a very good suggestion of speaking in Mandarin, if Ris felt more comfortable conversing in it. English may be our first language but some people are more conversant in our second language. That does not make them any less Singaporean or a disgrace to our country.

According to the organizer now, the Youtube video showcasing her bad spoken English was based on a one-off incident, and that should not have made our judgement of her permanent, as it had. The organizer felt that the owner of the video was being malicious towards her reputation. Ironically, she had spoken perfect English during the pageant. Why did the newspaper put quotation marks outside this phrase then? Was it trying to show blatant disagreement with this viewpoint? The pageant organizer had no reason to lie for her.

No comments: