Wow. I watched it all the way through. I barely made it out of the first few episodes, where it was clear that they were largely choosing contestants based on how much they could emote and the personal story they could tell. And many talented people got through as well.
The middle episodes were fine -- the better home chefs were exalted and the weaker ones only good for their personal drama were weeded out. I was happy about this, and thought the show had a chance.
But the final episodes came full circle. Back to deeply subjective judging and a nice little personality contest perfect for good Reality TV.
So Whitney wins, and Master Chef loses (credibility). You could see the setup for Whitney about four episodes from the final, and the more critical members of Master Chef community chat boards were groaning..."please say this won't happen"...but it did.
I know at least half a dozen individuals who have incredible skills as home chefs, and would blow all 2010 competition out of the water. I talked to several of them who watched enough episodes to make a decision, and it is this comment from one of them" "If the show really is about the best home chef in America, I would take the risk of leaving work for 6 weeks to give it a shot. But it's a contest of personality over skill, and Master Chef producers get to play God...and that said, I'm not going to waste my time."
I'd love to hear your thoughts as well. Knowing how many passionate and talented chefs are on Chowhound, I am wondering: are you more or less interested in applying, knowing how season one ended?