The Grammys are the epitome of baby-boomer self-indulgence. They lost their street cred long before the Milli Vanilla faux paux. Only the Grammys would serve up nominees like Springsteen, Robert Plant, Eric Clapton, Paul McCartney, the Rolling Stones, Stevie Wonder, and Bonnie Raitt in a modern musical landscape. Where's the love for Sufjan Stevens, The New Pornographers, Sleater-Kinney, Spoon, Arcade Fire, Stephen Malkmus, or Neil Diamond?
Alright already. The Beatles only won Album of the Year once. Do we have to make it up to Paul for the rest of his life?
I'd never admit it in public, but "Since You've Been Gone" is kinda catchy. I don't want to like it, but I can't help it.
Stephen Malkmus and Neil Diamond in the same sentence? Whoa. I think I saw that episode of Star Trek -- you know, the one with the parallel universe where Spock has a goatee? :-)
Thanks. I'm trying to keep it fresh, although the more I learn about coding the more I want to trash the whole thing and start over.
I agree with you on the Grammys, but I'm of two minds. I remember when Steve and Edie were winning Grammys over my favorite singers, and how unjust I thought it was. But more than anything, the Grammys recognize the commercial viability of the music; anything new, edgy, avant-garde might get lip service, but won't win -- by definition. Or so I thought.
Then Coldplay won. Are the Grammys getting cooler? Are Coldplay just hacks?
I decided that, once in awhile, a band hits that nexus where cool makes cash. Enough cash that the RIAA takes note. But the band didn't sell out to get there and the music establishment didn't suddenly get cool by recognizing quality music.
So I'm pleased that Green Day's American Idiot is having this astounding commercial success and, like Billy Jo said last night, "Rock music is being played on pop radio."
Still, I can't get it out of my head that somewhere along the line the Grammys reward (or should reward) quality. Moreover, I'm probably a Kelly Clarkson snob because I think she's M.O.R./Made for TV.
As for the canonization of Paul... Nah. I wouldn't have reacted so if the other vocalists (Sheryl Crow, Gwen Stefani or the other one) beat Paul. But American Idol beats The Beatles? No way.
So, the most commercial record won a Grammy. The world hasn't really gone mad after all. whew!
Next time you drop by, please leave me a nickname. I lose track of all the anonymouseseses.
Kelly Clarkson has great writers. And I have no problem admitting that I like her voice.
And yes, Coldplay are hacks. Hacks that get to me emotionally and hacks that really know what they're doing but hacks all the same. Still, I love them.
7 Comments:
The Grammys are the epitome of baby-boomer self-indulgence. They lost their street cred long before the Milli Vanilla faux paux. Only the Grammys would serve up nominees like Springsteen, Robert Plant, Eric Clapton, Paul McCartney, the Rolling Stones, Stevie Wonder, and Bonnie Raitt in a modern musical landscape. Where's the love for Sufjan Stevens, The New Pornographers, Sleater-Kinney, Spoon, Arcade Fire, Stephen Malkmus, or Neil Diamond?
Alright already. The Beatles only won Album of the Year once. Do we have to make it up to Paul for the rest of his life?
I'd never admit it in public, but "Since You've Been Gone" is kinda catchy. I don't want to like it, but I can't help it.
Love the site. Please update more often.
[singing to myself]
Since you been gone
I can breathe for the first time
[gets up to dance]
I'm so movin on
Yeah yeah
Thanks to you
Now I get
What I want
Since you've been gone
Stephen Malkmus and Neil Diamond in the same sentence? Whoa. I think I saw that episode of Star Trek -- you know, the one with the parallel universe where Spock has a goatee? :-)
Thanks. I'm trying to keep it fresh, although the more I learn about coding the more I want to trash the whole thing and start over.
I agree with you on the Grammys, but I'm of two minds. I remember when Steve and Edie were winning Grammys over my favorite singers, and how unjust I thought it was. But more than anything, the Grammys recognize the commercial viability of the music; anything new, edgy, avant-garde might get lip service, but won't win -- by definition. Or so I thought.
Then Coldplay won. Are the Grammys getting cooler? Are Coldplay just hacks?
I decided that, once in awhile, a band hits that nexus where cool makes cash. Enough cash that the RIAA takes note. But the band didn't sell out to get there and the music establishment didn't suddenly get cool by recognizing quality music.
So I'm pleased that Green Day's American Idiot is having this astounding commercial success and, like Billy Jo said last night, "Rock music is being played on pop radio."
Still, I can't get it out of my head that somewhere along the line the Grammys reward (or should reward) quality. Moreover, I'm probably a Kelly Clarkson snob because I think she's M.O.R./Made for TV.
As for the canonization of Paul... Nah. I wouldn't have reacted so if the other vocalists (Sheryl Crow, Gwen Stefani or the other one) beat Paul. But American Idol beats The Beatles? No way.
So, the most commercial record won a Grammy. The world hasn't really gone mad after all. whew!
Next time you drop by, please leave me a nickname. I lose track of all the anonymouseseses.
I see that Kelly Clarkson speaks to Trusty. Whatever gets you thru the night is all right, is all right.
:)
Today I'm singing:
You can run you can hide, but you can't escape my love . . . .
Enrique Iglesias
But, alas, no Grammy for him.
:)
Kelly Clarkson has great writers. And I have no problem admitting that I like her voice.
And yes, Coldplay are hacks. Hacks that get to me emotionally and hacks that really know what they're doing but hacks all the same. Still, I love them.
Post a Comment
<< Home