November 26, 2013
-
Death Comes To Award Shows
Music is the biggest passion in my life. So it should come as no surprise to anyone that knows me that I scrutinized the American Music Awards in a way most people probably would not. Most probably wouldn't care in the first place. But I can't help it... I care.
Okay, enough of the babbling. What am I talking about? I'm talking about the fact that there is a very real possibility that music awards as we've known them will become obsolete. They're dying a slow death. What makes me say this? Partly because there's been a trend in the music industry where the lines between genres are routinely blurred to the point of being nearly unrecognizable.
For instance, long ago there was a clear distinction between country music and pop music. So much so, that the country music industry felt the need to establish its own awards ceremony, the CMAs, in 1967 (there are currently 4 major awards shows specifically for country music). But let's be honest, the crossover of modern country music into mainstream is pretty much a done deal. Aside from the occasional slide guitar or a lively fiddle, a lot of what is considered to be "country music" sounds a great deal like "pop music" (hello Carrie Underwood and Taylor Swift).Of course, the same can be said about R&B/Soul music. If Justin Timberlake can win the AMA for BOTH Favorite Pop/Rock Male Artist and Favorite Soul/R&B Male Artist, it really makes you wonder how those genres are actually defined. If one person is simultaneously a Pop/Soul/R&B/Rock artist, then what really is the point of having a category at all?
As it is, the whole thing seems rather farcical to me when you've created genres and award categories, like "Gospel" and "Contemporary Christian", that are based solely on subject matter. If that were to hold true across the board, we would have to add categories like "Favorite Misogynistic Single of the Year" or "Best Sexual Exploitation by a Band, Duo or Group".
Personally, I think the days of Awards ceremonies are numbered. I give it another 10 years before it gets to the inevitable point of being discontinued. Besides, when it's all said and done, good music is good music, regardless of any box society may want to place it in.
Comments (7)
I just take it as entertainment, not as serious artistic kudos.
Maybe that's cuz I'm not a professional musician like you.
But the truth is also that generations before us , artists like Elvis were thought shallow, sexist, too sexual, immature, etc. As we age, the music of the younger generations will likely become more and more irrelevant to us.
But...
That doesn't mean their art is worthless.
Hmm... I reread my post. Did it really come across as criticizing the quality of the music?
That was certainly not my intent. The point I was attempting (and obviously failing) to make, was how categories are becoming more and more superfluous, and the fact that if there were no categories, there wouldn't be a need for award shows because we wouldn't separate country from pop from R&B. 
Ugh... FAIL. lol
The reason I read it that way was because it seemed to me that you'd like the music industry to be a waffle. Clearly designated, defined slots for what might be even subtle differences. But music is more of a pancake, I think. Everything is connected, sometimes the lines are blurred, but even so, there are still definite opposing sides to that music pancake. I just don't think it's surprising or wrong that the lines are smooth and interconnected.
The beat of the heart. The rhythm. The order in chaos. Expression.
I totally agree with you! Actually, using your analogy, I've ALWAYS seen the music industry as a pancake. Personally, I don't think the waffle ever really existed.
I think it should be perfectly normal (and highly encouraged) for an artist to express themselves in whatever style they choose. Rappers sing. Singers act. Actors write. Writers play instruments. I think we do ourselves a disservice by attempting to pigeon-hole someone based on what we've come to expect from them. I thought it was rather cool, if not a bit ironic, that Justin Timberlake won in two seemingly diametrically opposed categories.
All art is that way. Just look at Picasso for an example. Not just one category all the time.
I don't want you to think I miss the point and title of Award Shows. But I view them much more simplistic. They are commercial. A show to generate or renew hype in a day and age where album sales are down and digital downloads are up. Why categorize the way they do? It's the science of consumerism.
I don't see the shows leaving our screens any time soon. They generate hype. Hype generates $$. Whether it's organized or not.
Perhaps that's the part I missed or at least chose to ignore. I mean, is promotion the primary purpose of these shows? And here I was thinking that it had to do with celebrating music.
Then again, I should've known better. It's the same with "talent" competitions like American Idol or X-Factor where it's clearly less about talent and more about popularity.