Thursday, December 4, 2008
I don't put much stock in awards, especially ones that have a prime time special to announce the nominees, so why do I care about the Grammys? The new talent.
It's easy to see that people get nominated because they have a name, Paul McCartney "That was me" shaking my head, But artist like Adele, Duffy, M.I.A., The Mars Volta, Raphael Saadique, etc. may have been around but never got the exposure they deserved. So for the undeserving, Metallica, to the perennials, John Mayer, we get a glimmer of what awards should be...The most deserving artists of the year get recognized. Sorry Wild Sweet Orange, your debut may be great but I'll see you in five years in the best new artist category.
If only the best get recognised, no one will tune in to the awards "show," Because the the best hasn't reached the main stream yet. Then Coke won't have an audience to pimp its product and isn't that what it's all about, marketing.
So, you'll have to have the average and the "has beens" to get in the audience. So you'll see the Eagles, Al Green, and Jay-Z and they may win but should they?
Even though it's flawed maybe the Academy Awards can take a hint from the Grammys. Take a chance on something, dare I say, independent. A picture without a distributor or even "stars." You may say that I'm a dreamer... Oh wait, Carol King's "You've got a friend" won 1971. Imagine that.
Prediction: Coldplay - Viva La Vita - Wins 5 out of 7
Buddy Guy is a lock.