Grammys

I didn’t watch ’em, but was gratified to read the piece in Newsweek about the general growing consensus that A) the quality of available music (especially pop music) is at an all-time low, and B) the music industry is getting kicked on its ass. I’ve been moaning about #A for a very long time and it’s nice to see a pub like Newsweek come out and say it rather than pretending. I’d like to think that if lots of money is siphoned out of the music industry, it can only have a positive effect (music may become a meritocracy again, or at least something resembling it … people voting with their downloads rather than gagging on the spoon-fed banana brulee’).

And to have all these judges give awards to the O Brother soundtrack … was just too sweet for words. I had long since given up hope that the Grammys would ever reward talent again.

Poetic justice on me that Engelbert Humperdinck should be rolling through the itunes queue as I write this ;)

2 Replies to “Grammys”

  1. I am absolutely horrified at this years Grammy award show. I am 23 and don’t get me wrong I love old school which Simon and Garfunkle, James Taylor, and “The Boss” are to me, but how about giving some credit to my generations talent. I could have saved myself three hours of television by just tuning in to the twenty minutes that was actually worth my time – that would include the Dixie Chicks performance and acceptance speech, Eminem’s acceptance speech and performance and the Nelly and Kelly Rowland performance. The rest of the show was not meant for the people actually interested in this show.
    And I’m sorry but what happened to this being an awards show?!! How many awards were actually aired? There were certainly more performances than awards. I can watch MTV for the performances. I want to know who wins the awards and watch them thank the people that are important to them!!!
    I have never been so disappointed in an award’s show – next year I might just save myself some time and watch the people’s choice awards. Lord knows they make more since I mean come on.. Who the heck is this Norah Jones chick whom I’ve never heard of yet had to watch accept more awards than any one else – I listen to all the radio stations – oldies, country, rock, and the stations that play all the newest stuff over and over and I have never even heard that depressing song that Norah sings before!!! (I’m sorry but if you can’t get them on the radio they don’t deserve an award!) Where did she come from and why on earth do your voters think any normal person would want to listen to her music?! I want to see the people that I listened to all year win an award – they are the ones that have spent time earning it!!!
    Seriously I know you have to go with the votes on the winners but you all might want to start looking for younger voters because this was extremely upsetting to us. And you need to show more of the awards on the show not so many performances, and certainly not so many performances by the older generations, one or two… ok but beyond that we are watching for the newest hottest groups.

  2. Thats all it is -a show. A showcase for the music companies to celebrate this great “art” they are delivering to the masses.
    In film for instance, the cost is so high to produce one that a relatively finite number are produced each year, therefore it is possible for the community of critics to see a good number of them, cross pollinate with in their community what is out there, and be able to deliver the critical recognition to the best ones whether they win an Academy Award or not.
    Music is different. It is relatively easy to produce so therefore literally thousands of songs are produced by various acts each month (week?). There is no way possible for anyone to sift through all of this. The music industry machinery pushes a good number they deem marketable to radio and TV (performances on award shows give songs great exposure). Sure there are a few others that make it from time to time they weren’t big sellers like the Steely Dan album that won a Grammy for the best album a few years back, but let’s not forget that that group had it’s share of music industry machinery pushing them for years prior. So it is obvious that due to the recognition factor (and also let me add that unlike most movies where you have some time to absorb and develop an opinion whether you like it or not usually by the time it ends if not before, songs tend to have to “grow on” a listener and need to be played a few times before a person can cast an opinion) the judges have a narrow perpective of what is truly out there. In others words, they only hear the songs deem marketable by the record companies and God knows what allegences (alliances) are made between the music moguls and the judges that cast their votes.
    This being said, the best way to look at it is it’s all just for show put on by a now desperate group of music indutry hucksters that are finally getting what they deserve now that the very technology they made billions off of for so many years is turning against them in the form of internet downloads.
    And isn’t it a coincidence how all the pretty faces most the time win the prize at the Emmys? What a great lesson to teachs the kids of America. F2ck the Grammys.
    Chris Rock made a great statement recently when he said it was stupid to give out prizes for art. Now they want to dump him as MC of the Academy Awards for this and a statement he made about gays which was just a comedic bit I am sure he didn’t mean to be taken seriously. But then again, neither should any type of award show or beauty contest or blurred combination of the two.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.