So, every year that goes by I feel the Grammys sort of lose their grace. The thing that irks me the most is the fact that the same artists are nominated for so many different awards. For example, Taylor Swift: 8, Beyonce: 10, BEP: 6. Where is the diversity? There is so much music in both the mainstream and “indie” world that all artists and types of music deserve a chance to be in the running.
The people who run the lackluster/stale award shows like the Grammys say they lose more viewers each year, and that they are trying to find new ways to bring the viewers back. One suggestion, which I believe they will try to focus on, is the entertainment portion of the program. Instead of focusing in on the awards themselves, they hope people will watch the show to see the artists. Granted, a lot of viewers will tune into watch the performances, but do we really want or need to see the BEP perform “I Got a Feeling”, a track that has been so over played this summer? Or Lady Gaga doing “Poker Face” running around in a Kermit costume showing her little pecker? (Which she was nominated for–don’t know why because there are much better songs than that, that should have been in the running). I sure won’t tune into to see a performance like that, I’ll just watch it on YouTube the next day.
Maynard James Keenan, lead singer of Tool, had this to say about the award show, which I totally agree with:
“I think the Grammys are nothing more than some gigantic promotional machine for the music industry. They cater to a low intellect and they feed the masses. They don’t honor the arts or the artist for what he created. It’s the music business celebrating itself. That’s basically what it’s all about.”
With that in mind, here is my suggestion to make the Grammys more attractive to all and get the viewership they want: don’t only include the mainstream artists that we hear about over and over on MTV. Now a days, the music community and the public are infused with many different types of music from all over the world. The influence of the internet, file sharing and free form social collaboration has allowed artists to collaborate creating new sounds and genres of music week after week. The influx of this massive change in how music is created as come to the point where music industry leaders must start to look beyond the top 40 lists they create and begin to acknowledge the talent beyond the Beyonce’s and Britney’s of the music industry.
A prime example of a group who deserves more recognition would be Phoenix, whose latest album, Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix, was brilliant. It was so good that production houses have used their songs in commericals and theatrical trailers to promote products such as the Cadillac SRX and movies and T.V. shows such as “Cougar Town”, “Where the Wild Things Are”, “New York I Love You”, USA Networks “Royal Pains” and everyone’s favorite “Entourage”. Also, lets not forget the tons of remixes done of many of their tracks; a sure sign that Pheonix has some good music.
Another example of an artist who deserves more recognition would be Asher Roth who has blown everyone away with his lyrical skills and catchy beats. Where is he in this 52nd annual award show? Other examples include Calvin Harris, The Knux, Empire of the Sun, Animal Collective, Metric, N.A.S.A, Chester French, and many more. They all deserve some consideration.
The music industry is in a revolution of sorts with our generation (the 80’s babies) leading the way. It is not like it used to be back in the 90’s. It’s in a new state of evolutionary infancy, one that is very malleable. The National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences should take a look at hypem or last.fm and discover artists that may deserve consideration for these prestigious awards. Once they have a wider grasp of this evolving industry and what the people want to hear, not only will they get the viewers they so desperately want, but that recognition alone will also bring back the appreciation the public once had for these award shows. On a side note, lets be honest, without new music this world would suck.
I might not even turn on the Grammys this year. If I do tune in, it will only be to see if my predictions were correct and so I have something to talk/rant about the following day. Oh and to see LL Cool J host. Deep Blue Sea anyone?
Just my opinion, enjoY!
Blakroc – Coochie (feat. Ludacris & Ol’ Dirty Bastard)
Hey BoomBoomChiksters!
In response to my colleague’s, Jemex, post, I just want to add my two cents. According to a friend of mine who studies music business, performers invited to perform at the Grammy’s are asked to pay to perform at the ceremony which I suspect has to do with the costs of putting together a performance (lighting, sound, props, etc). Essentially, the Grammy’s ask mainstream artists to perform because 1. they are known to wider audiences and can be a pull to get people to tune in and 2. because they can pay for it. Furthermore the awards that are televised at the televised event are a tiny percentage of the actual awards given. Grammys are awarded to opera and jazz musicians, for example, choirs, and for boring ass stuff like sound engineering, etc. etc. These awards are given out at a ceremony sometime before the live event. The Grammys certainly milks the music industry’s cow but it only does so in order to get the general viewer interested in the award. Awards have no intrinsic value, right? The only thing that makes them “valuable” is that people give a f*ck. And why do people give a f*ck? Who knows, perhaps it has something to do with who can throw the biggest bash, and the Grammy peeps certainly have the pull and the prowess to throw a big bash. Thus, to ensure high ratings, they get mainstream artists because they are known by a large audience and these artists, who have lucrative performing and touring deals, put together shows that are more like a circus act than a music performance. Remember, mainstream music isn’t about making good music and performing good music like (insert your fave underground band here). It’s about putting together a show. This is why the Grammy folks don’t get small acts on the show. These acts can’t afford it, only three viewers know who they are, and this undermines the Grammys appeal to the average viewer. I hope I have made it a little clear how this is a greater issue and not one limited to the Grammys. The very existence of mainstream entertainment is creating something that doesn’t exist. An award called a Grammy doesn’t mean a damn thing, but if you can get enough people to believe it does mean something, then it will mean something. So there you have it.
Thanks for reading BBChik!
-b do c
BBChik’s international correspondent