Music Missive XIII
By: Ken Brzezinski |
Monday February 01, 2010 |
 |
| I'm listening to a band called Taking Dawn. They are a straight rock/metal band out of Las Vegas Nevada. Halfway through their first record Time To Waste, I am almost 100% convinced they will never win a Grammy. Not because they aren't good enough. I don't know if they are THAT talented after one album but the record rocks for sure. But it's not because of their talent (or lack of depending on how you view the band) that will keep them from getting that stupid looking little statue. It's because a) they aren't old and therefore a "legacy" and b) they have music that has a resemblance of what are called testicles. What do I mean by this? Let's delve a little further shall we? Come with me..... Let's travel back to a very scared point in American society. Rock music, as it always was, was castigated as an infection on society and the youth of the nation specifically. But now, rock music was coming with a lot more of a groove, way more than Elvis could have ever imagined. Led Zepplin, had an overpowering groove at times and a young guitarist named Carlos Santana was reinventing the way people played and looked at music and the guitar. The first man to take music that way since Hendrix. In 1970, he released his (until 1999) best selling album Abraxas. On it were a litany of masterful guitar pieces along with two songs that would become autonomous with him "Oye Como Va" and "Black Magic Woman". Songs that still to this day, are held up as some of the greatest songs every written. Yes, I know Santana didn't write them, but when people think of "Oye Como Va", they aren't thinking of the Tito Puente version. No, they hear the soul, the color, and the flavor that Santana using what became almost a magical instrument in is hands, from that track on Abraxas. But there was a problem; this music was a bit TOO colorful. It does have a psychedelic feel to it. Not full on late stage Beatles psychedelia, think more "light Hendrix". God knows we can't give out a Grammy to a guy who might be on drugs. The guy is also taking huge chances musically, and we (the Grammy board) haven't had enough time to figure out if we can tell people to like it or not. So let's see, who did they give Grammys to that year that may have gone to Carlos Santana....Blood Sweat and Tears, Joe South, the 5th Dimension all for "Best" song/album/whatever, and Best New Artist CSN - the Y. What GARBAGE. Blood Sweat and Tears and the 5th Dimension!? ARE YOU KIDDING ME!? Talk about flash in the pan. CSN - Y I can get with but the rest of it is crap. But fear not, because a mere twenty nine years later, after Carlos Santana and an all-star cast released Supernatural, Carlos got his. Look, don't get me wrong, it's a pretty good album. But it is far, far from Santana's best. All of the awards he won that year were one thing and one thing only; an apology. "Sorry we basically took a shit on almost three decades worth of amazing music from you, here's 9 Grammy's all at once. Please forgive us. Well it's too late "Grammy board" your pseudo music "awards" already meant a little more than bird droppings before you exposed yourself for the whores you are in 1999. This one bites me pretty close...In 1988, heavy metal in the pop-o-sphere was on the decline. The tired ass act of bands like Warrant, Motley Crue, and Poison were growing old. But there was one beacon of light. A fearsome foursome of heavy metal mastery who are touring around the country. selling out arena after arena ON THEIR OWN, with little to no play from the toddler version of MTV and pretty much no radio play. Yet there they were, packing 10,000 seat venues like it's second nature. Add to that, they just created what some consider their most "metal" album, long, drawn out, complex, almost no bass; and on this album is what would become One of not only their most prolific songs, but One of the most influential songs in the genre. Metallica were taking metal to a new galaxy and a "Best Metal Performance" Grammy had just been introduced. So who won this Grammy? Jethro Tull. A band with a LEAD FLAUTIST!!!! God even the word "flautist" sounds un-metal. And trust me, I am totally for the breaking down of barriers in music. You can use a flute or whatever in metal or any other music, but not the way Tull did it. Nope, the Grammy was, as usual, given to the "safe" choice. Just f*cking pathetic. Once again, the wise and all knowing "Grammy Board" shoot themselves Cheney style, directly in the face. But worry not Grammy fans. All hope is NOT LOST. Despite what you might think, there is a way to salvage this clusterf*ck of an award and give it something resembling credibility in the eyes of anyone who actually listens to music and doesn't just mindlessly bob their heads to whatever is on the crappy top 40 station in their city. Realize that record sales aren't the end all be all- I know it's hard to believe but just because a lot of people buy something, doesn't mean there is a direct correlation between that and the talent of said musicians. See Britney Spears, The Backstreet Boys, N'Sync, Taylor Swift, Steely Dan, and Rob Thomas w/ Santana. That's not to say that some of these people don't have some sort of talent (especially Carlos because he does) but the ONLY reason any of these people win Grammys is because their records sell and in Steely Dans' case, they sell to the ears of the old crusty members of the wise and all knowing Grammy Board. Steely won a ton of Grammys in 2000 yet there was a guy coming up from Detroit, a rapper whom you may have heard of named Eminem. Yeah he released what almost everyone considers to be his best album that year The Marshall Mathers LP. An album that in no uncertain terms, tore up the f*cking charts, just what the Grammys love. That album sold more than any other album to date in one week of sales. Well, that seals it. Eminem won that year right? Nope, sorry, you forgot about the "testicle" rule. Can't rock the boat too much if you'd like to win a Grammy. Image Control- I realize this one is a long shot but it's worth a try. Hey Grammys, you want to know why no one watches your crappy awards show? Not only is it the bias you have towards good music, but it's your whole presentation. Stuffy snobs in suits and bow ties who are "just glad to be nominated" drinking champagne, fakely clapping when someone else wins. It's pathetic. You can see it in the eyes of some of these people when they lose and are panned over to when the winner is going up and they have to clap on camera. They're thinking "Man, my record did better than his, and I thought I bribed the judges enough to get this one." Ok that last statement was a low blow. But my point is it's stuffy. Don't believe me? Why do you think for a time MTV and their awards shows for music and movies were kicking the ever loving crap out of yours? These people whom you'd like us to believe are demi-gods were allowed to show up wearing whatever they wanted and act however they wanted. Fans got to see who these people REALLY were (to a point) and not just see what is essentially their head pasted onto a stupid looking suit with an even dumber fake ass smile on their face. Award Expansion- Your attempt to be all inclusive as the years have gone by is noble if not dumb considering what century were living in. Where on the planet does anyone think that DISCO is still relevant? Please tell me because I can't understand why the hell you would still be giving out a "Best Disco" Grammy. Folk, Jazz, Spoken Word; all of these are very important and viable genres in music. But Polka, Urban/Alternative, and American Roots Field? Perhaps I'd relent on the Urban/Alternative if you smarmy pieces of crap that are the Grammy Board could explain it to me; but I'm betting you have an intern who actually knows their stuff find some albums for you, write them down on a piece of paper, and then you throw darts at said piece of paper, and voila "Best Urban/Alternative" Grammy winner. I'd believe that you gave a crap about this award if it wasn't one of the 500 that you leave OFF TV in lieu of crappy sounding performances (not because of the artists as much as it the amazingly bad sound set up the Grammys continue to have year after year) So since you are going to IGNORE the genres you deem "not worthy" anyway, come up with some better categories. You do know that there is a difference between heavy metal and pop heavy metal right? Of course you do, you're on the same level as the great and powerful Oz. You can say the same thing with Rap. Well first of all, there IS a difference between Rap and Hip Hop, yet another thing you simple minded folks haven't been able to get your heads around. Bottom line is, here are some of the categories I'd like to see Best New Artist- Hard Rock Best New Artist- Rap Best New Artist- Metal Best New Artist- Hip Hop Best Hip Hop Best Pop Metal Best Metal Best Hard Rock Best Pop Hard Rock Fans Choice Award- Metal Fans Choice Award- Rap Fans Choice Award- Hip Hop Fans Choice Award- Hard Rock Fans Choice Award- Dance Best Pop Country These would show the fans of music that you don't just see things in simplistic terms. Yes, I know, the very act of categorizing is simplistic, but we all have to make concessions to make this work. And hey, if both sides can come together, who knows maybe the people who run our country might take notice and do the same as opposed to just arguing with each other. |
|
|
|
|