Is this indicative of what the state of music is these days?
Country, rap, rock, pop, electronic, arty, folk, Americana, etc.
Young and old.
Tastes are fractured these days. There is no perceived 'talent' being delivered by the powers at be because no one can agree on what 'talent' is.
For the 12 year olds watching, talent is the Jonas Brothers, Miley Cyrus, and maybe Justin Timberlake.
Hipster teenagers and college kids say talent is Radiohead, Lil' Wayne, and Kayne.
Baby Boomers are gonna love Sir Paul, Ali Krauss, and that guy from Led Zeppelin. They love to say Rap is one letter short of crap.
And Kid Rock, K. Urban, and Carrie Underwood speak to the bud-heavy drinkin' Nascar fans, who will also clown rap and radiohead and anything that doesn't hit them over the head.
I'm over generalizing but,
It's the way programmers and the academy put the show together. How is it rationally possible to label the "BEST" in music for 2008 when the variety and value are so fractured and spread across infinite demographics?
It was a convention of representatives. And while they're presented as being all that 2008 has to offer in music, the ratings will indicate how untrue this idea is! No one cares about the Grammys because people do not need their favorite musical artists to 'win' anything (much less an award awarded to hundreds every year).
How does this make sense? What does it matter? All in all this year's convention seemed ok. Just like always.
The real winners will be the one's who come outta the Grammys with new fans.
Posts
6 months ago