Almost every year I find myself getting sucked in to this extravaganza. I admit that I'll hate myself in the morning, but I do it anyway. O wretched man that I am, who is there to save me?
This year I don't hate myself as much as usual. Although the Grammys will always be a celebration of style and popularity over substance, there were several performances I actually liked, among them Radiohead's/The USC Marching Band's (best performance since Fleetwood Mac's Tusk) take on "15 Steps," Justin Timberlake and T.I. (now there's a phrase I never expected to type), and Paul McCartney's surprisingly sprightly version of "I Saw Her Standing There."
There were the usual headscratching mashups (Stevie Wonder and The Jonas Brothers? Sugarland and Adele?), but overall I thought the performances were more interesting and varied than usual. The awards? I don't really give a rip, although if somebody has to win these things, it might as well be Robert Plant and Alison Krauss. I think Alison Krauss has won something like 173 Grammys now. It's hard to fault someone, though, who sings and plays so well, and is so self-effacingly shy. And Robert Plant! I'll even let it slide that I've had Raising Sand for something like two years now.
i used to get sucked in back when i had a tv, now i just watch the highlights online the next day.
don't you think the grammies should follow the calendar year. when was 'raising sand' released anyways?! i enjoyed that album, but 'album of the year"? don't think so...
I was confused about "Raising Sand" too. I remember getting it well before 2008. I also saw that "Enchanted" was nominated for some awards, which is also confusing, because I'm pretty sure those same songs were nominated the year before. How does that work?
The grammies usually just makes me sad to see how many great records are overlooked for mediocre ones that had more money behind them.
Post a Comment