Hear Me Out: Who Wants A Grammy Anyway?
Look, I'm not just hating on the Grammys here; I used to hate them with a passion, admittedly, but now I just kind of sneer at them from afar with mild disdain. It's a shallow ceremony designed to drive sales, an industry celebrating everything about itself while patting its highest grossing earners on the back and attempting to project the vocation of "musician" as the glitzy, highbrow profession it pretty much universally is not. I know it's not for me, but the fact that it pretends to be the be all and end all of the best of music is irksome and problematic.
After so many years of snubs, shocks and outright head scratchers (honestly, Black Eyed Peas have six Grammys, and one of them is for My Humps), one has to wonder just what it is about a Grammy that convinces so many of an artist's worth? Why is Kanye so upset that Beck beat Beyoncé (and the sixteen other people who produced her record) for Album of the Year? At the end of the day, Beck gets to sell a few more copies of Morning Phase and Beyoncé gets to keep being Beyoncé: win win. It's not like Beck just got some kind of overdue credibility as an artist that was sorely missing from his career while he was making records way better than Morning Phase (Is anyone really, truly going to dismiss Odelay in comparison?). In the grand scheme of things, a Grammy doesn't really do anything for an artist aside from a small bump in album sales, and even that's only really for the big winners. Do you really think sales of the Dio tribute album are going to surge because they gave Best Metal to Tenacious D's cover of The Last In Line (more like the latest in a long line of Metal Grammy misfires amirite)?
Don't worry, Kanye; Beyoncé and the twenty Grammys she's won to date are going to be just fine. Just ask Led Zeppelin, who conquered the world without winning a single Grammy until 2013. Or Madonna; although a seven time winner in smaller categories, she's 0 for 3 on Record/Album/Song of the Year nominations and 0 for 4 in the prestigious Pop Female Vocal category. Or The Rolling Stones, whose storied and illustrious discography has netted them a grand total of two Grammys (both in 1994, no less). Hell, consider this: if you combine all the Grammys ever earned by The Who, Pink Floyd, The Doors, Ramones, Black Sabbath, AC/DC, Queen, Guns N' Roses, Jimi Hendrix and KISS, the total is still two less than those earned by The Black Eyed Peas. Let that sink in. Yes, as a matter of fact seven of the ten artists I just mentioned have never won a Grammy. Ever. Yes, My Humps has earned more Grammys than The Who, Ramones, Queen, The Doors, Guns N' Roses, Jimi Hendrix and KISS combined.
No one would accuse these Hall of Fame acts of having shitty careers, but if they're so good why didn't they win Grammys? What do you have to say about it, U2? Oh, I don't think they could hear me with their 22 Grammys plugging their ears. By the way, if the Grammys are the pinnacle of musical achievement, then 2004's How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb is U2's best album in a landslide, winning them eight of those shiny little bastards.
Look, again, I get it: taste is subjective, you can't please everyone all the time, it's just business, etc. etc. I'm just suggesting that maybe we can learn something from the crazy figures I just laid out. Maybe we shouldn't put so much stock in the importance of these little trophies; there are plenty of mind-blowing musical experiences out there that weren't deemed award-worthy for one reason or another, but are no less capable of shaking you to your core. By all means, check out the new Beck record; I didn't like it much, but maybe it's exactly the record you need right now. When you're finished with it, check out a few more. Explore beyond the reach of those little golden trinkets and find something to give the most important award to: your seal of approval.
Comments
Post a Comment