grammy's recap

i was going to blog on last night's grammy's which i thought were quite boring, but junichi who is guest blogging on oliver wang's blog, nailed it pretty much on the head. the only thing that i would have to add is how many freakin' lifetime achievement awards can they hand out in one night.

ok so i lied, i have more to say. seriously, is there anything as a true awards show anymore where they give awards to people who actually deserve them in the year they get them, instead of what we have now, where people get awards for being old or dead? or more accurately, where people get awards for not offending white sensibilities. how does usher's yeah, not win the record of the year award? how does a dead ray charles and an infinitely boring norah jones win with a decidedly boring song. people, it's not like ray and norah spent a few weeks writing and then producing the song. ray charles needed some cash, so he throws together a duets album in the same way that sinatra did a while ago and they sing a song that he's sung a zillion times before and then sits and counts his money. don't get me wrong, i think ray charles is as genius as they come, but it seems kinda lame that they would only give him a fake tribute by giving him a posthumous grammy.

No comments: