The Grammys were first established back in 1958 and were first televised in 1971 on ABC. Over the years, the list of Grammy winners has yielded some well deserved honors and some head scratching ones (remember when Jethro Tull won the Grammy for Best Hard Rock/Metal Performance?) Lately, the Grammys have represented nothing more than a self-indulgent celebration of a music industry that is on life support due to sagging album sales and changes in the ways we obtain our music, plus a reflection of the musical tastes of the Recording Academy and not the record buying public. This has led to discontent among musicians who feel that the value of the award has been diminished greatly due to overwhelming Academy influence.
I wholeheartedly agree that the Grammys are not as cherished as they once were. They have misrepresented the true winners in some ceremonies and have given undeserved honors to has-been artists and one hit wonders. If I was charge of the Grammys, there would be several changes that I would make that would greatly benefit both the viewing audience and the music buying public. Here are some changes that I would make:
- Ask the general public who should be nominated and who deserves the award in the first place. The Grammys fierce competitor, The American Music Awards, follows this same exact methodology, so why wouldn't it work for the Grammys also? Conducting a popularity poll with the general public would represent an entire cross-section of the United States, and that alone would be a true representation of what is the best music out there.
- Modify the eligibility process for receiving a nomination for a particular award field. This past year, it was determined that Lady Gaga was ineligible to receive a nomination for Best New Artist because she had been nominated for a Grammy last year, even though this was her first album. This technicality totally disrupts the honor and merit of the Grammys and thereby robs the artist of an award based on Grammy rules and guidelines, which are severely outdated anyway and need substantial review and updating due to the ever changing musical climate. One rule change that I would make in this instance is that if an artist was nominated in the previous year for an award and it's that artist's first album that establishes their public identity, then that artist should be eligible for the Best New Artist award that year or the next year, plain and simple.
- Expand the field of nominees from 5 to 10. Year after year, artists who released work in the eligibility year that was deemed to be critically acclaimed upon the general public, was shut out of a particular award category to make room for another artist who released work of a lesser quality or was deemed unworthy of a nomination altogether. Doing this will give all artists a fair shot of receiving an award, and will be a melting pot of sorts representing all genres of music, levels the playing field susbstantially, and gives everyone a fair shot at receiving the award as well.
- Consolidate the long three hour telecasts this year and cut down on the performances. Every single year, we are inundated with the same old formula where it's award, performance, award, group performance, lifetime achievement award, etc. One solution is to hand out all the prominent award categories in a short, two-hour format with a handful of award presentations and performances in between that gives equal billing time to both parties and enables the ceremony to run in a linear fashion and smoothly as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment