I think it's too early to make assumptions about this. The only crazy thing about Australia is the costuming, which can change 'cause of the backlash and "Kemama" is simply a song that's more on the "fun" side and that's it. Even with Samanta Tina, I'm getting more "early Lady Gaga" vibes than "wacky Eurovision entry" ones - which is still kind of odd, admittedly - and quite a lot of electronic music niches can sound weird to general audiences, it's not all that crazy.
Now if, for example, the Finns are high enough to pick "Cicciolina", that would be something that screams mid-2000's ESC.
It's a double edged sword as far as i'm concerned. I really can't be dealing with this super overly serious everything must be super deep meaningful piece of art dripping in originality that many people seemed to have adopted. It just becomes a total yawn fest and I find it so fake and plastic in many cases. There is always room and there always should be fun and carefree entries. Crazy is part of Eurovision whether you like it or not and there is always a sense of excitement of seeing something kinda funny doing well and winding up people who take life too serious. I agree certainly it was very widepsread in the 00s and that contributed to the bad rep Eurovision got but you cannot deny Eurovision was very fun. It's fun now, but there is a certain atmosphere the 00s had that the 10s just don't have anymore. Certainly the juries are not here to kill them off though. They're here to judge each song on their individual merits and cast their votes as non-biased as possible (yeah not so much the case), and many of these 'crazy' songs are well produced and very well staged.
I find Eurovision to be a notch better than regular mainstream pop which basically has this irritating constant retarding effect on anything new that's happening. At Eurovision you can actually see top songs in a style that was popular a few years back. The popularity of that style never waned, but it was co-adapted and quickly debased to cast a wider net for the mainstream. This happens mainly in the US where the music industry is absolutely vile and extremely efficient in outright blocking or co-adapting to competition. Net effect though is that Europe has had ample space to work with. Most countries have a fairly healthy national music scene because a lot of people just don't listen to mainstream US pop anymore. I don't know about other countries, but the Netherlands has seen vast improvements to its national scene in the last decade or two.I mostly agree with you. The way I see it, the Eurovision musical landscape isn't really all that different from regular radio or charts - there's plenty of novelty/comedy songs that have become pop hits, all sorts of different music is represented (although I'm aware some countries like the US have these narrow radio/chart formats that wouldn't obviously count), and so on. Eurovision does have more folk/culturally specific types of music I guess, due to it's nature.
People laugh at Eurovision while streaming Gangnam Style. I think your assessment is correct, Eurovision used to be silly. This was when televoting reigned supreme, but right now it's in a very good spot. If you want to be silly that's fine, you can ignore the juries at your own peril and it leads to silly entries at least trying to come across as something decent.I don't really buy into the idea that silliness is somehow more part of Eurovision than the general music market, though. It's just the perception among some people or countries partly because, in the past, it kind of was. Currently I'd simply consider this statistically likely that if we have 40+ new songs each year, a few of them will be more silly or gimmicky.
I'm open to crazy entries returning, but I want it entertaining and relevant.
No more things like "Irelande Douze Points", "Luta e Alegria", Izabo's "Time", or a lot of those we have in 2006,
but more awesomeness like "Hatriđ Mun Sigra", "Igranka", or of course "Dancing Lasha Tumbai", is welcomed.