2011 Grammy Awards: When Did Mediocrity and Banality Become Something to Strive For?

I haven't been a big fan of the Grammy Awards here in the U.S. for the most part of my life, but I wasn't completely bothered with who and what types of music were being awarded during certain years it was hosted. But after reading the nominees for the upcoming Grammy Awards several days ago, I almost bludgeond myself with a one of my guitars. Seriously, this is the worst list of nominees I've ever seen. Justin Bieber is nominated for Best New Artist, Katy Perry is nominated for Best Album, Lady Antebellum is nominated for Song of the Year... you get the point. Really, these are the absolute best people in music as of 2010? Why do these mediocre and banal hacks get to be considered amongst the best musicians of the year when there is so much better music, both in style and substance, out there? What makes it worse is that these people who get nominated use that as a validation as to why they're are good at what they do and why they consider themselves "artists".

Here, have a look at the list yourselves and try to resist banging your heads against your desk in disgust (Fortunately, people like Arcade Fire and Norah Jones are nominated, but I have a feeling they'll be overlooked): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Grammy_Awards#Pop

This is just a continuation of the darkest period of music quality in history that has occured since about 2003 (probably earlier than that). Oh well, at least two of my favorite bands (Tool and System of a Down) are off their hiatuses next year and hopefully they can make new albums soon. I also heard Rage Against the Machine may make a new one soon as well. I also hope guys like Aphex Twin, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Wu-Tang Clan, Massive Attack, Primus, etc. make new albums soon, and bring the spirit from the late 1980s-mid 1990s back into mainstream music and cause a massive shift towards "real alternative music". I hope for this because originality is strongly lacking in most music today, so a revival in the spirit from people like these guys can hopefully cause other musicians that are lesser known or starting to become professional musicians to be influenced towards making original and passionate music themselves, and not fall into the trap of recycling the garbage that alot of these new mainstream musicians are making today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICWS

Katy Perry

---

Bet she's a reet goer mind, I would

Re: When Did Mediocrity and Banality Become Something to Strive For?

It's the new way, it helps all those who are ****ing useless feel good about themselves

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolton Midnight

Re: When Did Mediocrity and Banality Become Something to Strive For?

It's the new way, it helps all those who are ****ing useless feel good about themselves

---

Do you think liberalism is at fault for that?

Greetings and salutations,
I don't put any credence in the Grammy Awards
I know what types of popular music I like and the artists that perform it regardless how they are graded by these so called experts. A while back I mentioned to a friend that I wasn't overly enamored with Sting. I know a lot of people were, and are. But that really is of no importance to me. This person went ballistic: "How can you say that after all the awards he has won" I went on to say: "I don't dislike his music. I am just not inspired by it" As I stated in another thread, the appreciation of art is subjective. I don't begrudge anyone the awards that they receive, nor do I care if a movie I hold in high regard is "god forbid" only rated 3 stars. I really don't see why this is an issue. At least it is not one with me.

Well I genuinely think that Lady Gaga is extremely talented and her nomination for best female pop vocal performance is very merited. Just to add - I don't usually listen to much 'pop' music (my last.fm profile - http://www.last.fm/user/AndySpeed) but I do enjoy a bit of Gaga. :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Alcatraz

Greetings and salutations,
I don't put any credence in the Grammy Awards
I know what types of popular music I like and the artists that perform it regardless how they are graded by these so called experts. A while back I mentioned to a friend that I wasn't overly enamored with Sting. I know a lot of people were, and are. But that really is of no importance to me. This person went ballistic: "How can you say that after all the awards he has won" I went on to say: "I don't dislike his music. I am just not inspired by it" As I stated in another thread, the appreciation of art is subjective. I don't begrudge anyone the awards that they receive, nor do I care if a movie I hold in high regard is "god forbid" only rated 3 stars. I really don't see why this is an issue. At least it is not one with me.

---

But the point I was making is that a lot of these musicians seem to be recycling the same type of music other people have done a couple years before over and over again, yet they somehow get credited for being "original, artistic, deep, meaningful, brilliant, etc.". And these musicians get awarded as well by the self-proclaimed experts of music. I pretty much realize that the Grammy Awards, and other award shows like that, is simply a manufactured celebration of the industry itself and it allows those involved in the industry to pat themselves on the back for making millions of dollars each year they do the awards show.

Art is certainly subjective, as you pointed out. But to me there is a rather obvious distinction between those who make art for the purpose of appealing to their own and potentially other people's emotions, senses, and intellect, and those who make art for the purpose of commerce and commercialism. In the case of music, some musicians have the ability to include both purposes when making their music, but most musicians tend to fall into one or the other purposes. I really do think the Grammy Awards, 98% of the time, put the spotlight those who make music for the primary purpose of making lots of money. And to me, that's where those musicians' art becomes meaningless, shallow, mediocre, banal, and goes against what art was originally meant to function as.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndySpeed

Well I genuinely think that Lady Gaga is extremely talented and her nomination for best female pop vocal performance is very merited. Just to add - I don't usually listen to much 'pop' music (my last.fm profile - http://www.last.fm/user/AndySpeed) but I do enjoy a bit of Gaga. :up:

---

In your opinion, what makes her talented? Is it because she went to an art school? Because she plays the piano? Or is it something else?

Because in my opinion, she isn't that talented in comparison to somebody like Norah Jones, and I don't really think the music she does is fresh or original considering lots of other pop muscians do the same type of music. There's too much of that electropop/dancepop music out there already, and plenty of it came out before and around the same time she came around. Black Eyed Peas, Katy Perry, Usher, Beyonce, Rihanna, etc. all came before she did and they all do essentially the same kind of music, which is pathetic considering they are rip-offs of Britney Spears, Paula Abdul, Madonna, Janet Jackson, etc. You could say she's better than others who fall under that style of music, but it's not anything unique, great, or special to me. I also don't hear that much progression in her music, which leads me to believe that she's a trend and will eventually fade away like most other pop musicians.

Once again, that's all my opinion, and I would appreciate your feedback and I'm curious as to why you think she's talented.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICWS

I haven't been a big fan of the Grammy Awards here in the U.S. for the most part of my life, but I wasn't completely bothered with who and what types of music were being awarded during certain years it was hosted. But after reading the nominees for the upcoming Grammy Awards several days ago, I almost bludgeond myself with a one of my guitars. Seriously, this is the worst list of nominees I've ever seen. Justin Bieber is nominated for Best New Artist, Katy Perry is nominated for Best Album, Lady Antebellum is nominated for Song of the Year... you get the point. Really, these are the absolute best people in music as of 2010? Why do these mediocre and banal hacks get to be considered amongst the best musicians of the year when there is so much better music, both in style and substance, out there? What makes it worse is that these people who get nominated use that as a validation as to why they're are good at what they do and why they consider themselves "artists".

Here, have a look at the list yourselves and try to resist banging your heads against your desk in disgust (Fortunately, people like Arcade Fire and Norah Jones are nominated, but I have a feeling they'll be overlooked): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Grammy_Awards#Pop

This is just a continuation of the darkest period of music quality in history that has occured since about 2003 (probably earlier than that). Oh well, at least two of my favorite bands (Tool and System of a Down) are off their hiatuses next year and hopefully they can make new albums soon. I also heard Rage Against the Machine may make a new one soon as well. I also hope guys like Aphex Twin, Nine Inch Nails, Faith No More, Wu-Tang Clan, Massive Attack, Primus, etc. make new albums soon, and bring the spirit from the late 1980s-mid 1990s back into mainstream music and cause a massive shift towards "real alternative music". I hope for this because originality is strongly lacking in most music today, so a revival in the spirit from people like these guys can hopefully cause other musicians that are lesser known or starting to become professional musicians to be influenced towards making original and passionate music themselves, and not fall into the trap of recycling the garbage that alot of these new mainstream musicians are making today.

---

2 words.......Millie Vanillie!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndySpeed

Well I genuinely think that Lady Gaga is extremely talented and her nomination for best female pop vocal performance is very merited. Just to add - I don't usually listen to much 'pop' music (my last.fm profile - http://www.last.fm/user/AndySpeed) but I do enjoy a bit of Gaga. :up:

---

I too enjoy her music. In my opinion she is very entertaining and has catchy songs. But I am not an expert to explain whether she is talented or not. I simply enjoy her songs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bolton Midnight

Bet she's a reet goer mind, I would

Re: When Did Mediocrity and Banality Become Something to Strive For?

It's the new way, it helps all those who are ****ing useless feel good about themselves

---

I think that these are simply the most popular stars. The alternative is to be like the Academy Awards, which usually are given to movies which are completely unknown to the general viewer.