Opposing viewpoint: You don’t hate the Grammy’s; you hate radio overplay
January 28, 2015
People often crown music as the most influential universal language that connects all communities. Regardless of its evolution, music often reflects society’s conditions during the tune’s release. Some songs transcend time and maintain influence far beyond its age. And while these songs prove “few and far between,” they do exist and one could possibly receive a Grammy this year.
Technically speaking, the Grammys do not receive the same respect as other awards shows such as the Oscars. This particular award ceremony has snubbed several worthy songs, artists, and albums. Regardless of this flaw, the current nominations should not receive criticism. In fact, I quite enjoy many of them, but perhaps we hear them too often.
For example, Pharrell Williams’ “Happy” possesses an encouraging message and catchy tune. However, when radios blast it and films use the tune, it becomes grating and immediately added to my “if I ever hear that song again I will hurt something” list.
When Pharrell sang, “Because I’m happy/ clap along if you feel like a room without a roof/clap along if you feel like happiness is the truth,” I actually felt unhappy because he sang that and I most definitely did not clap along. The Grammys, however, nominated the song for Best Pop Solo Performance. And while I still get nightmares about happiness, I still believe the song deserves the honor. I cannot discredit the music’s quality for the radio stations’ lapse in judgement.
The 2015 selections do not “suck” as some claim, but we have lost sight of their meaning or become desensitized to their tune. Maybe Meghan Trainor’s “All About the Bass” and Iggy Izalea’s “Fancy” cannot compare to The Beatles, Nirvana, Led Zeppelin, and The Rolling Stones, but they were part of an age in which songs manifested themselves based on what happened around them: a reflection of society. Today’s music does the same.
Other nominated songs include Sam Smith’s “Stay With Me,” Sia’s “Chandelier,” Hozier’s “Take Me to Church,” and Taylor Swift’s “Shake it Off.” Each one encapsulates the year’s best music and songwriting, and contains a message that we can all relate to. Those songs deserve their nominations. The Grammys did these songs justice.
While some condemn other songs’ nominations, most were well received by both critics and the public alike. For example, “Fancy” received positive reviews from critics and peaked at number one on iTunes. Musical critics, whose job entails separating poor songs from impressive, acknowledged “Fancy” as impressive. Some may disagree, of course, but there lies the beauty of entertainment: we can disagree with one another.
Our opinions concerning songs will always prove subjective, and someone will always dislike a song most love. Someone will always disagree with the quality of the songs the Grammys nominated.
As for the unnecessary categories and apparent inconsistencies, perhaps the Grammys still needs work. Eventually, these little flaws will work themselves out. For now, embrace the awards for what it was created for: celebrating today’s artists and age, while we can still appreciate the Beatles and Nirvana era.
Those bands will always shine in immortality, and we can always celebrate them in our own way. But bemoaning the fact that the Grammys do not contain the likes of those bands proves pointless. We should not compare today’s songs to yesterday’s because we will always believe current music will fall short to the classics.
Can't Get Enough?
