To Hell In A Hand Basket

[BarryL]

When rappers get the most nominations for Grammy awards, you know that popular culture has gone to hell in a handbasket.

[Dusty Chalk]

Dude, the Grammy's were a joke a long time ago, made evident by the whole Milli Vanilli scandal.

Sorry, though, gotta disagree with the rappers slam, though. Just because it's not your thing (and it ain't mine, neither), doesn't mean it's not a legitimate musical art form.

[-Jar-]

this is great..

Dark rockers Evanescence were also represented in the best new artist category alongside rapper 50 Cent, the alt-pop group Fountains of Wayne, R&B singer Heather Headley and dancehall artist Sean Paul.


http://www.msnbc.com/news/1001153.asp?0cv=CB20

Um.. Fountains of Wayne.. New Artists??

They reunited in 1996 as Fountains of Wayne (so named in honor of a New Jersey gift shop), issuing their acclaimed self-titled LP on Atlantic; that same year, Schlesinger also enjoyed success as the author of the title theme to Tom Hanks' rock'n'roll movie That Thing You Do!

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p...=Byf1uak1kgm3b

stupid Grammys..

[Whooptee]

I generally agree about the Grammys straining their credibility with their nominations, but I also think Outkast is most deserving of their 6 nominations. Those guys are good.

John

[joel2762]

Rap is just fast talking. Big deal. Anyone can do that.

[Mr MidFi]

Rap is just fast talking. Big deal. Anyone can do that.

And running is just fast walking, so Carl Lewis was no big deal either.

[Troy]

And running is just fast walking, so Carl Lewis was no big deal either.

Carl Lewis was a fast runner, but it's still just running regardless of how fast it is. Anyone can do it. Some people find watching people run exciting, I guess, but to me and lots of other people, no Carl Lewis WAS no big deal precisely because it's just running.

Ergo, if rapping is just fast talking, well then it's still just talking . . . and anyone can do that.

Hey, enjoy yourself with these things. Hell, I like auto racing and anyone (except J) can drive a car so I'm just being an ass at this point.

BUT

Part of what makes music so appealing is that it's one of those things that everyone can't do. Give me singers, give me musicians. Not just fast talkers.

[Chris]

Rap is just fast talking. Big deal. Anyone can do that.

Can they? Can everyone talk fast AND keep a rythym? Can you? If so, I'd suggest you go get a record deal with the amount of money that's being thrown at these so-called, "talentless" rappers out there.

The majority of rap that is out there is not what I'd call "art". I don't like much of it. Most of it has all the same lyrics anyway. But you can't deny that some rap artists have a talent that others can't duplicate. If rapping was just fast talking, you'd see way more people doing it, and a lot more people making money in that industry. Obviously, it isn't something that just anyone can do, and do well.

However, I don't think receiving a Grammy makes the music good. It's more like a popularity contest than a testament to how good the artist/album is. Good music is subjective. It's called "personal taste" and "opinion". It IS all music in some way, shape or form, regardless who here says otherwise. You cannot scientifically break down what makes something musical. It's not a scientific theory. It's preference. If it makes you feel good, and makes you want to dance, it is musical. Just because it has "fast talking" in it, doesn't mean it is NOT music.

I don't think River Dancing is "real dancing". It looks like anyone can do it. But in reality, it probably is not easy, and it is a form of dancing. I just don't like it. Just because I don't like it, doesn't mean I can say that it's not real dancing.

[DariusNYC]

Outkast and Missy Elliott are innovative, fun, intelligent, and wildly popular artists that deserve anything they get as far as awards go. Beyonce's and Justin Timberlake's albums were critically quite well received, and as they're quite popular it makes sense that they were nominated (I haven't heard these albums other than the singles, which were catchy pop and of course not groundbreaking). Evanescence completely sucks.

I think this Grammy slate is better than some previous years I can think of. The fact that Outkast and Elliott were nominated in general categories is a good sign, not a bad one.

Black acts have dominated Grammy nominations in recent years partly because rap artists and r&b artists have been more successful in recent years in making highly popular music that doesn't suck. Not better overall in making music that doesn't suck; there's a lot of rock acts that are making music in that category too, of course. But how many of those quality current rock acts have managed to be as popular as Outkast? Very few. Hence the Grammy's, which is partly a popularity contest, is dominated by rap and r&B acts. Good for them. I don't really care at all about the Grammy's but I don't consider it necessarily a bad sign. Better than some old adult contemporary fogey getting all the awards.

[jack70]

Interesting Troy raised the "sports" comparison with music. There were some recent discussion on a hoops board I read after Kasparov beat Big Blue (computer), as to whether chess is a "sport". Despite chess players burning off 10 lbs of weight during a match... I don't think it is. Neither is darts, pool, bowling or even golf... which are more "skill games". Real "sports" (to me) combines competition (games) and a high athletic dimension (either endurance, strength, or some combination). BTW, Carl Lewis had both a great natural talent and worked extremely hard to get to the world class level he did... same as great pianists & violinists do. It takes BOTH natural talent and work. As for the off-hand comment about Lewis "just running"... that's way too dismissive of his incredible work ethic and mental tenacity to reach that level.

Likewise, I see Rap as "outside" of music... it uses few of the disciplines/skills of "true music" (a little rhythm is all). No (even basic) melodic or instrumental skills are required, something that even a 5 yr old pianist or singer must master. Simply put, it's NOT music.... no more than "chess" is sport. But that's the closest place to dump it... so we deal with it; but don't kid yourself, it ain't really music. It's more akin to poetry... but it's been 100 years since poetry has been "hip" in our popular culture... hence Rap gets placed in the "music" dumper... for better or worse (worse IMO).

It's no more "music" than gambling/gaming is "sport". (Has nothing to do with aesthetics, Dusty... check).

As for the Grammys... they've been a joke for years (forever). Just a self-serving commercial money-making scheme. If someone wants to watch em for the "entertainment" value... fine, but that's it. There's at least some intellectual honesty in giving awards and trophies to sporting competitions... but to Art? Gimme a break.

Think the rappers are bad Barry? How about Hillary Clinton getting nominated for reading her book... gimme a frickin break! Maybe they'll come up with a Grammy category for "singing pets" next (a la David Letterman). Don't laugh.

BTW, I've NEVER watched even a second of the Grammys... ever! I might watch it for Singin' Pets though. They're marginally more talented than a lot of the poseurs up there.

[Troy]

As for the off-hand comment about Lewis "just running"... that's way too dismissive of his incredible work ethic and mental tenacity to reach that level.

Yes, lots of work and reasons to give up. It's running taken to another level, but to those of us that couldn't care less it's still just running.

It's more akin to poetry... but it's been 100 years since poetry has been "hip" in our popular culture... hence Rap gets placed in the "music" dumper... for better or worse (worse IMO).

Wow, I like that. It's quite true. Think about the current wave of poetry "slams" happening in many American urban areas. Virtually everyone involved is black and the atmosphere of a lot of the pieces is rather rappy.

[BarryL]

Hillary Clinton getting nominated for reading her book?

That woman lives a blessed life. She helps boot Nixon out of office. She gets away with $100,000 insider-trading profit before insider trading is a political issue. She becomes first lady. She gets a multi-million dollar book deal. She become a Senator.

And now a Grammy Award Nomination!!!

You gotta love it. Only in (God Bless) America.

BTW, thanks for the timemachine disks. I've got some stuff going out that you might get before Christmas, but don't count on it.

[DariusNYC]

Likewise, I see Rap as "outside" of music... it uses few of the disciplines/skills of "true music" (a little rhythm is all). No (even basic) melodic or instrumental skills are required, something that even a 5 yr old pianist or singer must master. Simply put, it's NOT music.... no more than "chess" is sport. But that's the closest place to dump it... so we deal with it; but don't kid yourself, it ain't really music. It's more akin to poetry... but it's been 100 years since poetry has been "hip" in our popular culture... hence Rap gets placed in the "music" dumper... for better or worse (worse IMO).

Not sure why you're definining music based on what technical skills are required to produce it. We don't hear "skills", we hear the music itself. Do we like it, do we find it pleasurable, powerful, compelling? Does it create an emotional or other reaction in us? This is how you judge music (and, incidentally, any art) and criticisms of any art based on the process used to create it will always be misguided (and unnecessarily elitist). And such criticisms are usually invoked by people with quite narrow tastes in music (or, for visual art, by the "I could've done that!" anti-20th-C.-art crowd). So, if you hate rap (what little you've heard, as you seem to have very little knowledge of it as evidenced by your statement), if it doesn't do anything for you, then say so; that's cool, a lot of people don't like rap. But delegitimizing it is a cheap and elitist move. Anyhow, the specifics are your statement are b.s. as well -- and really, they're so 1983 (although they were wrong back then as well) -- if you listen to any rap being played on the radio today, it's obviously music, and that's why it's universally recognized as such. And even if we accepted that technical skills of individual artists, rappers or musicians are relevant in themselves to the judgment of the finished product, rapping well, writing good rap lyrics, creating the instrumental portion of a rap song, all of that requires tons of talent to do well. So what's the issue.

[jack70]

jack70:I'm cool with Rap being called "music" (no skin off my as_)... but I just think it's a hybrid that's something a little different. I think a lot of people are misreading the way I want to "classify" Rap, as a slam on it.

Okay, you say this now, but yesterday I read yr post that said:

I see Rap as "outside" of music
and
Simply put, it's NOT music
and
it ain't really music.
I see a big difference there, don't you? And I direct this to Troy as well, and Barry, and anyone else who's going to try to tell me that rap--a genre I mostly stopped listening to over a decade ago--is 'not music.'

I'm simply saying I don't consider it music, but it don't bother me that others do. This isn't something I'm all that worked up about, that's all (despite the size of this thread, LOL). I DO see Rap more as performance art or poetry than music. If others see it differently, so be it, is all. There are people of religion that similarly feel their religion is the word of God, yet most are willing to accept the fact others see the "world of God" differently. Those that DON'T are a bit (lot) whacked (like OBL). I'm a little whacked... but not a LOT.

No, I don't consider certain CD's, LPs and cassettes "music" -- my George Carlin, Jean Shepherd, Henry Rollins, Fireside Theater, LBJ tapes, Bob & Ray cassettes, etc etc. I don't even consider a lot of Laurie Anderson's stuff "music"... it's also out on the fringe and deserves a "better" term.

As to those BN musicans playing on certain Rap records... you've obviously got a much wider view of the whole Rap genre, so I'll specify my view. I'm talking about some of the a-cappella Rap, or stuff with a cheesy "rhythm" machine churning in the background, yet totally out of rhythm. That's the stuff I'm speaking of. So, I'll grant you that there is some Rap stuff that has enough musical involvement to be considered more under the "music" umbrella. But... a LOT of it just isn't. And simply being live on stage isn't necessarily a "musical" event; it could also be public speaking, poetic reading, dramatic reading, acting, performance art, etc.

Jack -- yes, most certainly definitely I forfeit. If you consider never accepting the initial challenge to your game as a forfeit. I hate people who try to spin-doctor a non-game as a win.

I accept your forfeit! (Just kiddin ya... I'll take whatever I can get) Your "scene" was hilarious (LOL)... touché

...I've put my cat on the keyboard once and got than some of the things I've heard.), but it's still music.

So a monkey typing gibberish on the keyboard is "literature"? gimme a break... Sound ain't music, and too much modern "expressionism" really ain't art; it's simply... expressionism. This is more artistic (cultural) relativism gone beserk IMO... a sign of the times, I suppose.

I guess you think my facetious idea of a grammy for "musical pets" has some legitimate musical validity? Whatever...

Just for the record, Hilary was nominated in the "Spoken Word" category -- a category which has nothing to do with music, officially. I.E. those of you who pretend that this is some slight against the term "music" are deliberately using this fact incorrectly. The organization that sponsors the Grammy's is the Recording Academy, and...

Yeah, I do know that the Grammys have a spoken word (non-music) category. Unfortunately this (lousy) web type of communication makes for "leaving out" a lot of stuff (cause of time). I brought up the Hillary nomination because I knew BarryL would get a laugh out of it. (Barry, you started this whole messy thread!) As someone who's recorded lots of music and spoken word over the years, I'm well aware of the technical aspects and reason for the award. But I found it typical (& humorous) of such a media-linked-event (grammies have become a "show"), that they'd nominate someone like Hillary. It's just so "PC"... and such a crock. Without hearing any of the other spoken-word works from last year, I'll go waaay out on a limb and bet that there are 5, 100 or 200 that are more deserving. Yeah, I'm not surprised they're flaunting her, but it's political, not artistic or technical... don't anyone kid themselves.

Most of the "music" grammys are likewise also based on likeability, cache, politics and other "high-school voting" dynamics, instead of a higher standard. It's (primarily) a popularity contest... more cynically it's a commercial vehicle to sell "product" by a bunch of suits. You see the same thing with the Oscars, where many of the voters, although in the biz, haven't even seen the works they're voting on. You add into that mix the million$ paid by the studios to champion certain films and stars in advert-campaigns, and you often get similarly nutty nominations as the Grammys. I much prefer reading lists of "best" films or "best" albums by writers or knowledgable people in the industry... their motives are not "selling their companies product," or "pushing a political agenda," but just an honest appraisal/opinion from their well honed experience.

Not sure why you're definining music based on what technical skills are required to produce it. We don't hear "skills", we hear the music itself. Do we like it, do we find it pleasurable, powerful, compelling?

Where to begin.... first music is AN art, it isn't "ALL art". Rap is simply a DIFFERENT art IMO... like drama, poetry, etc. Painting... IS NOT MUSIC either. Of course, if YOU WANNA SAY IT IS... go ahead. But something is not simply "what you say it is". There are certain historical frameworks of accepted ideas about many things, including various arts. There are some modern artists that have confused many people that "there are no longer any rules", and something is "whatever I damn well say it is". I say, "BS"... Dixieland is NOT Opera music... abstract expressionism is Not surrealism. The lunatic on the corner baying at the moon... is NOT a performance artist. IMO, some Rap is not music.

Does it create an emotional or other reaction in us? This is how you judge music (and, incidentally, any art) and criticisms of any art based on the process used to create it will always be misguided (and unnecessarily elitist)....And such criticisms are usually invoked by people with quite narrow tastes in music (or, for visual art, by the "I could've done that!" anti-20th-C.-art crowd)....

Read more carefully.... I'm NOT saying it's not art. (stop here & repeat). I'm NOT saying "I could'a done that". I'm just saying it's not the FORM of art you claim it is. (although some of it may be). It's a new, different type of art. My "criticisms" (if ya wanna call em that... but it's not) of Rap, have NOTHING to do with the processes inherent to it. My "criticism" is simply one of nomenclature and subtype. It's a fine point, and one that too many have missed.

As to "elitists"... it's idiots who watch some no-talent playwright, musician, or artist and accept it as "good" because they don't want to be judgmental that are the elitists. Art is not just about one's personal expression, it's about imparting that emotion to others. You can atonally bang on the piano all day long if you want, and you can call it "art" if you you want, but it ain't "music"... it's masturbation. That's fine for the person doing it... but don't tell me I'm elitist because I don't appreciate it.... jeeze.

[Finch Platte]

...how the heck I'm supposed to follow who responded to whom?

Merci.

fp