Regarding the purple curtain situation, as I've said earlier, in this episode the judge' biases and blind spots are starting to get more and more blatant.
It was ridiculous the way the judges got so breathless over Erik's little curtain: "It was so fresh!!!! Like they'd never seen a cream and black roman shade before.
Furthermore, the girls liked the curtains. Those customers were far more satisfied than Goil's customer (i.e., the dog). In this case the judges should have just left Michael alone: the curtains were beautiful, useful and functional; he did what the leader asked him to do; and he provided what the client wanted. Instead the judges (as discussed in a previous post) should have made Goil stand up there and defend his doggy wagon.
Then there is the matter of accusing Michael of spending too much time working on the curtains. Those curtains were a lot of work and they were the most aesthetically important part of the garage especially since Ryan didn't create any art. There was even a rumor spread -- by the judges! -- that Michael may have focused so much on this task because he was flirting with the tailor. So does that mean that Goil had a crush on the dog?
For the record: Michael's appearance on Watch What Happens and subsequent postings on Pink Navy (utterly delicious!) put this matter to rest.
I'm wondering if the judges have some sort of allergy to aubergine. Have they ever liked any one's use of that color? Or do they just associate that color with Michael and because they have it in for Michael they don't like the color?
Michael's color choice may be based on criteria other than the one that the judges accuse him of (i.e., that he just likes every shade of grape that he's ever seen). Honestly, could they BE any more condescending? Why don't they just make him wear a helmet and call him a REtard while they are at it? In fact, there may be a reason that demonstrates Michael's professional skills.
Maybe Michael picked that color because it was the color Mr. Bell was wearing earlier in the day? Consciously or not -- an astute designer would register those kinds of things.
I'm sure that if Matt had made the curtains would they have lavished praise on him as having a keen sensitivity towards clients and color (See: why matt can do no wrong).
NOTE: I have noted in an earlier post "accentuate the positive" that Jonathan Adler's blog was less snarky this week but when it comes to Michael: it is still sour grapes.
The final problem has to do Andrea's leadership, and in some ways, her integrity (although that is not a reality tv show value where the idea is to do what ever it takes to win). Here's the deal: Elizabeth had to take the hit for colors that weren't entirely her choice. And she got kicked off for this. (Although that was probably a trumped up charge just to get rid of the boring decrepit old lady in her forties. Yeah. Speaking of purple: someone who threw parties for Prince's Purple Rain tour couldn't possibly be very cool or hip or interesting.) But I digress.
In this situation Andrea had immunity. It was really quite small of her not to take responsibility for the color choice. She had to know that blaming Michael for that shade of purple -- which was not entirely his fault after all [added 03/12: see the quiet one for evidence] -- could have gotten him kicked off the show that night.
NOTE: Yes, I've been defending the boy a lot lately (although I was not an immediate fan). Lest anyone think I'm in danger of sounding like one of Michael's minions, let me be clear: I'm nobody's minion. (He can be mine, however: mainly shades, banshees, that sort of thing. It's better than cleaning out garages -- or picking up after the the hell-hounds of hades -- but unless you get an Elysian appointment it isn't very glamourous work. Of course I'd find a good place for him in the organization. Hell needs a lot of redecorating.)