The Grammys: Artistic Innovation or Industry Inflation?

By LARRY BONILLA/Staff Writer

Since 1959, the Recording Academy’s mission has been to recognize “excellence” in the recording arts by bestowing annual awards to artists. A core belief they have behind their decision making is to seek out creativity. This is a quality that “pushes us to think outside of the box,” “to innovate,” and “to challenge the status quo,” according to their website.

However, every year the tastes of the Academy conflict with the interests of listeners and critics alike. This comes down to the undeniable truth that the Recording Academy continually fails to recognize and reward artists who are innovative and inspirational. This statement is not hard to prove when you consider the existence of the term “grammy darling.”

The 66th Annual Grammy Awards, which was held this year, demonstrates issues such as these. With just one look at the albums nominated for “Album of The Year,” viewers can see with surprise how many are pop albums or artists who have already had history with the Grammys. This is not to say that all pop albums are not worth critical recognition; however, pop music is a commercial genre designed to be accessible and to be consumed. By design, pop music doesn’t need to tread new grounds or inspire people to make their own music; it’s only there for you to consume.

Thus, when the Academy nominates and rewards well-established artists who create primarily pop music, it is at the discredit of artists who have created imaginative and/or inspired works that were praised by listeners and critics. To name a few examples: JPEGMAFIA and Danny Brown’s “SCARING THE HOES,” ANOHNI and the Johnsons’ “My Back Was A Bridge For You To Cross,” Caroline Polachek’s “Desire, I Want To Turn Into You,” or even (a Tallies choice) Mitski’s “The Land Is Inhospitable and So Are We.”

If the Recording Academy is not interested in bestowing awards to, as they claim, “creative” artists but instead to a widely entertaining artist, it would be completely fine. However, if this were the case, then they should not portray such an award as the symbol of “excellence.” In modern media consumption, it is important to understand that while one may be widely entertained by the output of an artist, they must also recognize that critical excellence cannot be equated to entertainment. 

The deal is this: Taylor Swift and pop music are not the problem; the problem is praising music that takes us nowhere. So, my dear reader, I implore you to look at the music coming out this year and to – instead of prioritizing entertainment – recognize the critical excellence that can be found in unexpected places.