| |
Discussion: Is the Katy Grammy drag an act of jealousy in reality?
Member Since: 4/29/2012
Posts: 15,977
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Sakamoto
Receiving a Grammy award = having your musical contribution acclaimed and acknowledged by the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences of the United State = Acclaim
Beyoncé isn't the only acclaimed "pop girl" and this thread isn't about Gaga, but since you brought her into the discussion she happens to have won 6 Grammys in Three different genres, Dance, Pop & Jazz.
|
Yes Beyonce since 4 is the only mainstream pop girl that can be branded as acclaimed.
Quote:
Originally posted by Bounce
No 
You're acting as if GaGa's "gimmicks" is to hide her bad music which is wrong since GaGa is actually acclaimed, GRAMMY winning artist. |
I am only going to say this once more: the quality of the music is irrelevant to my point.
And yes according to metacritic 80+ is universally acclaimed and around 70 is generally favorable.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/16/2008
Posts: 59,380
|
What people fail to realize is that a grammy doesn't really matter to calculate the acclaim when legends like Queen and other never won a grammy and they are more acclaimed that all of your faves combined. To answer the OP yes, it is jealousy, mostly from those stanbases whose faves underperfom when they told they would destroy careers, etc.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/7/2011
Posts: 41,996
|
Quote:
Originally posted by romonster
It's a well known fact that Katy Perry doesn't have a GRAMMY, you can't blame the haters for that. Also it's not "the only thing they have left to drag her" when her lack of stage presence will always be an issue.
|
The thing is, everything else is subjective and just opinions.
There are people who call her talented and people who call her untalented.
She didn't win a Grammy and its a fact that's why her haters cling to this so hard for their dear life.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 13,761
|
omg come off this high horse. pop music is all about image and making others make you look good. there's no hierarchy in how you're known in pop music, it's IMAGE IMAGE IMAGE.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/10/2011
Posts: 16,324
|
Oh @ you considering R&B categories less competitive and less important
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 27,490
|
Quote:
Originally posted by UnusualBoy
What people fail to realize is that a grammy doesn't really matter to calculate the acclaim when legends like Queen and other never won a grammy and they are more acclaimed that all of your faves combined. To answer the OP yes, it is jealousy, mostly from those stanbases whose faves underperfom when they told they would destroy careers, etc.
|
The difference is Queen are actually acclaimed, Katy tho.....
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/17/2013
Posts: 6,922
|
Quote:
Originally posted by UnusualBoy
What people fail to realize is that a grammy doesn't really matter to calculate the acclaim when legends like Queen and other never won a grammy and they are more acclaimed that all of your faves combined. To answer the OP yes, it is jealousy, mostly from those stanbases whose faves underperfom when they told they would destroy careers, etc.
|
there's the rule and the exception.
some legends don't need acclaim or awards to be written about in the history, emphasis on some, but most artists need critical acclaim and awards like Grammys to be acknowledged and validate their impact.
although this doesn't apply on Katy since we all know her subpar vocals and performance skills won't help her squeeze her way into legend or icon status in order to bypass the need for critical acclaim.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/17/2013
Posts: 6,922
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Bounce
The difference is Queen are actually acclaimed, Katy tho..... |
I cringe every time someone tries to justify her lack of Grammy awards by saying "there's a lot of musical legends that never won one" as if she's a musical legend herself
woo lord 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/16/2008
Posts: 59,380
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Sakamoto
there's the rule and the exception.
some legends don't need acclaim or awards to be written about in the history, emphasis on some, but most artists need critical acclaim and awards like Grammys to be acknowledged and validate their impact.
although this doesn't apply on Katy since we all know her subpar vocals and performance skills won't help her squeeze her way into legend or icon status in order to bypass the need for critical acclaim.
|
And what makes 'em the exception according to you? Basically you all are saying no grammy = no acclaim. some of you are clinging to the grammys as if it was the only thing left for your faves, unless it is?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/3/2014
Posts: 6,577
|
Quote:
Originally posted by H-I-M
Just goes to show you that she's famous for the wrong reasons and that the music industry doesn't acknowledge her at all.
|
Not when Katy is known only for her music 
She sings at the White House, at the SB, sings for the Beatles anniversary, being personally invited by Paul McCartney himself etc. If you get nominated ever year, the music industry shows its respect and love. Don't embarass yourself.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/30/2011
Posts: 11,666
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Sakamoto
I cringe every time someone tries to justify her lack of Grammy awards by saying "there's a lot of musical legends that never won one" as if she's a musical legend herself
woo lord |
I mean she is, so...
Anyway, omg. No one wants to read these furious essays on why you hate Katy. You literally had her in your avi for six months, so stop acting like your taste is above her.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/1/2011
Posts: 19,016
|
Everything they drag her for is about jealously... this is not new.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/17/2013
Posts: 6,922
|
^
keep telling yourself she's a legend, as long is it helps you sleep at night boo 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/1/2011
Posts: 19,016
|
When Katy released TD and wasn't stomping on everyone's faves (see 192k opening week) everyone loved her. She's so unoffensive and just outright fun! Her agenda IS NOT critical acclaim (and I'm not making this up... she's talked about this multiple times). Her agenda has always been to have the hits and to make pop music fun again.
And as far as I can tell, she does it quite well. Life goal truly accomplished. There really is no reason to hate on her for not having critical acclaim because she it's truly not her first priority. Unlike the other girls who try too hard and make everything avant-garde and hard to digest and then lose their audience and wonder why. You're a pop star. You're not the next Picasso. If you want to be the next Picasso, okay, that's worthy and great, but don't wonder why you can't compete in the pop sphere anymore.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/7/2011
Posts: 41,996
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Allie
I mean she is, so...
Anyway, omg. No one wants to read these furious essays on why you hate Katy. You literally had her in your avi for six months, so stop acting like your taste is above her.
|
The expose, mess
OT: yes!
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/18/2013
Posts: 10,540
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Swine
Yes. Katy might have her 72x platinum self and #1 streaks, but she doesn't have the true critical acclaim Queen of Jazz, Empress of Asia, worlds' most famous person, the second most influential woman of the decade, 150M records-selling, six-Grammy winning touring force Lady Gaga has
|
So corny and cheesy. Who's talking about the Jazz singer in the OP. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/18/2012
Posts: 25,853
|
Does that mean by this logic, when the Katy fans drag Gaga for not having a #1 in 4 years, they're jealous about something?
|
|
|
|
|
|
