The Grammy nominations are in, and while I have no proof that the standards are more embarrassingly low this year than in years previous, I will say that I am now officially confused as to what the point of the Grammys is. Is it some kind of payola thing set up by the record executives, like the kind responsible for the success of The Black Eyed Peas' "My Humps"? Is it an excuse to bring in ad revenue for the TV networks, with the musicians just along for the ride? Can anyone think of a legitimate reason Gwen Stefani should be allowed to continue to create music?
And the nominees for Best Album of the Year are...
-"The Emancipation of Mimi," Mariah Carey
-"Chaos and Creation in the Backyard," Paul McCartney
-"Love. Angel. Music. Baby," Gwen Stefani
-"How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb," U2
-"Late Registration," Kanye West
Yeah, they all suck. So the Question of the Day is, who really deserves to be on that list? Who is that band or artist that you can't believe everybody doesn't love?
As far as this year goes, I'm loving the new Death Cab for Cutie, and while it's no Album of the Year, I think it deserved at least a nod. But my heart goes to my one and only, the late Elliott Smith. If it were up to me, this year's Grammys would include an elaborate thirty-minute segment during which Celine Dion is forced to ceremoniously return her Grammy for Best Movie Song to its rightful owner, ES, for his efforts on the Good Will Hunting ST, at which point the board of decision-makers pulls the curtain to reveal all the hundreds of artists in the US who are creating music that is advancing the art form in exciting and inspiring ways, and then everybody gets a beer and a free sandwich (low blood sugar can lead to bad taste in music) and a copy of XO instead of those over-the-top gift bags.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
