Grammy's sell-out is music fans' loss

Back - Index - Submissions - - What is RSS? Date: Feb 23, 2000 Source: The Miami Herald Submitted By: FRIcKy132@aol.com BY HOWARD COHEN Wednesday night, the music industry's elite will converge on an opulent Los Angeles auditorium, and nearly a billion viewers worldwide will sit transfixed in front of TVs, to witness Grammy Awards performances by the hottest of the hot -- the Backstreet Boys, Ricky Martin, Santana. What they'll be watching, as well, is the continuing commercialization of what used to be a merit-based award. Starting with the premiere Grammys in 1958, and for a few years to follow, the awards were handed out in private ceremonies, free from live television cameras -- and the hype that results when you mix TV ratings with superstar egos. Trendsetters and musical pioneers such as Ella Fitzgerald, Henry Mancini, Count Basie and Frank Sinatra were among the big winners in those early years. But scan the list of this winter's major nominees and you won't find a Sinatra among them. Not even a Frank Sinatra Jr. Instead, the list of contenders vying for awards in the three-hour live ceremony from Los Angeles resembles the daily lineup from MTV's Total Request Live -- which is probably more than coincidence, since that youth-friendly program is MTV's top-rated program. Ageless Chicano rocker Carlos Santana tops the list with 10 nominations, and that is a statement of artistic integrity. R&B act TLC is next with six, followed by the Backstreet Boys, Ricky Martin, Whitney Houston and country's pre-packaged Dixie Chicks with four. Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera also were multiple nominees. Part of the reason is the state of the industry itself -- the creation of ``product,'' not music, seems to rule the day at many labels. And granted, when talented newcomers sweep the awards, it keeps the music industry fresh. But when you fathom the idea that the 18-year-old Spears, best known a year ago for her decollete and lip-synching of pre-fab pop, could come to be identified as ``Grammy-winning artist Britney Spears,'' you really start to root for veterans like Santana and Cher. After all, true pioneers like Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, the Doors, Jefferson Airplane, the Supremes, Patti Smith -- even Queen and the Beach Boys -- never got to use the hallowed ``Grammy-winning artist'' appellation. Those oversights are more related to Grammy's historic ignorance of rock trends than commercialization, as the current Grammy brass will admit. ``As a working musician on the road, I thought it sucked,'' Michael Greene, president of the Grammy parent National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences, said from his Los Angeles office. ``I was pretty much a rock musician in the '70s and early '80s, and this organization was asleep. So many rock acts were [ignored]. ``The platform I ran on when I ran for chairman [in 1985] was pretty much to keep the few good things -- the trademark, the commitment to excellence -- but totally retool it and bring in modern music forms and a younger constituency.'' To some extent -- this year's bubblegum parade notwithstanding -- Greene has kept his word. A hard rock category was instituted in 1988, with Metallica emerging as the dominant act. Important bands like Nirvana and R.E.M. also have been honored in the last decade in the wrongly titled ``Alternative'' slot. Similarly, look for nominees Moby, Kid Rock, Limp Bizkit, Hole and Korn to duke it out Wednesday in the rock and alternative categories. And soul songstress Macy Gray is a welcome addition to the New Artist category. Other welcome additions are Contemporary Jazz Performance nominee Russell Gunn, who is being recognized for his creative jazz/hip-hop mergings, and jazz singer Diana Krall, scoring a space in the Album of the Year lineup. But part of the reason the Grammys lack a critical edge overall is because the awards reflect the state of popular music. And in its push for profit, the industry has clearly put mass appeal ahead of artistry. ``Drivel, commercial crap,'' is how singer/songwriter Joni Mitchell, a former Grammy winner herself, summed up today's most popular songs. Mitchell complains that today's artists have surrendered part of their soul to the creative teams that are composing more and more of today's formulaic hits. Cher's thrice-nominated Believe, for example, needed four songwriters and two producers to complete. Having Cher and Santana, both of whom have been around more than three decades, among major nominees offers an interesting balance to the Grammy youth brigade. And it reminds Martin and members of TLC and the Backstreet Boys that they should pay heed to the old adage about respecting your elders. The list of contenders vying for awards in the three-hour live ceremony from Los Angeles resembles the daily lineup from MTV's `Total Request Live.' Part of Grammy's game plan this year, NARAS' Greene explains, is to help some of these younger performers earn some measure of respect. ``We always try to find an unpredictable context to take a predictable act and perform it in a new way,'' he said. ``For example, the Backstreet Boys are considered by a lot of critics as being pretty much a production group. ``When we first started talking about what we would want to do with them if we wanted to put them on the show we talked about the fact that they are really good singers. It's been a while since we did any kind of tribute to a capella music or doo-wop or that sort of thing. So, well over half their [Grammy] performance will be a tribute to a capella singers.'' Hmm. Maybe steering the likes of the Backstreet Boys toward something more substantial is how Grammy can go about reclaiming the integrity it was born with. Comment on this item. Recent Comments Submitted by: Barneyxcq YqsHTp http://www.LnAJ7K8QSpfMO2wQ8gO.com Submitted by: JimmiNi 1Nq0Zy http://www.FyLitCl7Pf7ojQdDUOLQOuaxTXbj5iNG.com Submitted by: Mark Submitted by: James Submitted by: Kevin Comment on this item. Next Item: This is a teen's world Prev Item: The secret life of a Backstreet girl