|
Discussion: Carly gets 0 Grammy nominations
Member Since: 6/19/2012
Posts: 29,579
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Link
Are you people really using success as an excuse? Where are Britney's grammys? Where are Katy's grammys? They were on top of the game back at their peak.
Is Alabama Shakes a very successful act? Chris Stapleton? Kelly Clarkson (this year)? Esperanza Spalding? Beck?
God I cant...
|
the first 3 you listed have number 1 albums this year. they are successful, known acts despite not having the stardom artists like Adele and Taylor currently enjoy
try to come correct next time you post the toofunny3 emote
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 9,449
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Evolution
St. Vincent and many other artists less sucessful than Carly who have never had a hit have won Grammys/nominations.
The excuses in here, her album is bad, simple as that
|
So are you trying to say all albums not nominated for AOTY are bad?
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/21/2010
Posts: 29,122
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Sirnight
Don't act like her self-title didn't get hyped up by a large amount of critics last year (rightfully so).
She's not the only one who got snubbed. Sufjan truly deserved a spot for AOTY with 'Carrie & Lowell', and he didn't get nominated for anything.
|
Sufjan didn't submit Carrie & Lowell for Album of the Year.
|
|
|
ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 3/22/2012
Posts: 53,769
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Sazare
I mean I don't think anyone who really knows how the Grammys work expected her to get a nomination. As loath as I am to compare Carly to Robyn because I personally think the latter sucks, they're in pretty similar boats when it comes to ceremonies like this. They're both widely adored by critics and fans of the genre but ignored by the GP, and as such any nominations they manage to get would have to be for niche genre categories (all of Robyn's have been for Dance/Electronic, which is far less competitive than Pop, which is where Carly submitted).
If the Grammys ever actually did nominate the four or five most critically acclaimed works in every genre each year, no one would ever tune in to watch. In the end it all comes down to cultural saturation and commercial success, with quality mostly taking a backseat.
|
But with the way they market themselves - with the general perception being that they nominate the "best" music, at least among the GP - you would think there would be more integrity to the process and more adherence (not absolute, but more) to critical opinions and fan-based opinions instead of commercial appeal.
Quote:
Originally posted by Achilles.
It's not hard to understand.
Pop Album
Taylor: biggest star of Her generation with a year-defining pop album that is, in fact, as acclaimed as Emotion. (The difference in metacritic scores is negligible, but 1989 was higher on the cumulative year-end lists for 2014 than Emotion will be this year).
James Taylor: legacy act with a strong history of being nominated in this category, released his most successful album in years.
Kelly: Grammy darling.
Mark Ronson: the power of a SMASH hit is always enough to snag a nomination (see: Blurred Lines)
Florence: released a better album than Carly Rae Jepsen.
|
It's very difficult to understand, or at least to reconcile with their image and marketing. I'd argue against your rather silly claim about Florence when general consensus has shown the same amount of support for both albums, and I'd point out that my problem lies exactly in Kelly and Mark's nominations. Neither deserves to even be mentioned in the same breath as the other three this year, in terms of quality, and an album like Emotion would fit much better into the category. The fact that you said anything about Taylor's success, much as I love her, is yet another problem, because that should have exactly nothing to do with it in theory. It's further proof that Grammy Awards are full of illegitimate nominations based on what names will get the Academy the most viewers and attention, rather than even attempting to nominate the best music (and I do think Taylor would still deserve a nom in the pop category).
What is a Grammy even worth if they're not going to nominate what anyone (since it's subjective) considers the best music, some of the most recognized and appreciated work of the year? What is it worth if your victory is only over this year's most famous pop starlet, a couple throwaway albums from people who are or used to be successful, and maybe one legitimate challenger? What is a nomination worth if in some case you have arguably a better album by all counts than someone else who happens to win because they were popular and will attract viewers? What is your album worth when you aren't even nominated, but you potentially had a better record according to critics and fans alike than any of the records that were nominated, all of which have some measure of greater commercial success or a reason they appeal to the GP?
The fact that any commercialism is considered and the fact that they clearly just want viewers for their TV slot should force them to change their marketing. They should not be regarded by anyone, especially the general public, to be the gold standard for musical achievement if this is how they operate. Maybe there should be a different award night hosted by some other entity to award music that is truly great, or that pushes boundaries, or that innovates, but right now I'm dissatisfied with how the Academy portrays itself when it's just an circle jerk by music execs and the biggest stars with the occasional "credibility-boosting" win like Beck.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/25/2011
Posts: 10,337
|
I'm pissed off. Even if she didn't win, at least have her album nominated just as an example to the world that it was an amazing album.
There needs to be like, a critics choice music awards in America.
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/17/2012
Posts: 3,229
|
The album is quite average, minus Run Away With Me, and it saw no success at all. Therefore, it shouldn't be nominated.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/28/2012
Posts: 6,273
|
The album is so overrated and mediocre.
I don't understand how it's "surprising" that it didn't get nommed.
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 43,104
|
A tragedy
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/28/2012
Posts: 1,103
|
I wanna see some of y'all in nhb huns
|
|
|
ATRL Contributor
Member Since: 9/14/2010
Posts: 78,921
|
^ Wow go the **** IN
I could be driving you all night, and I'll find your lips in the streetlights!
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/7/2015
Posts: 6,901
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Saintlor
So are you trying to say all albums not nominated for AOTY are bad?
|
? St. Vincent wasn't even nominated for album of the year, it won Best Alternative album.
And no, nobody is implying that, the thing is that her fans say she isn't nominated for 'not being successful' when there are less sucessful artists who have won Grammys and have been nominated. EMOTION is simply bad, sorry.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 34,855
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Evolution
? St. Vincent wasn't even nominated for album of the year, it won Best Alternative album.
|
Exactly. "Best Alternative Album." A far less competitive and, more importantly, less populist category than the Pop categories. They're not comparable. But I'm sure you knew that.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 14,949
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Sazare
Exactly. "Best Alternative Album." A far less competitive and, more importantly, less populist category than the Pop categories. They're not comparable. But I'm sure you knew that.
|
Well if you know pop categories are competitive why are you throwing a fit?
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/25/2011
Posts: 1,634
|
The mess at people here dragging her album and calling it overrated.
Maybe to you cause you don't like it and you're on ATRL, but it's a freaking fantastic album.
I played it for my coworkers once while we were all working, and everyone loved it, including a straight football jock calling almost each song a "hit"
Stay mad though Too many people love to be contrarians, it's getting old.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/4/2014
Posts: 369
|
Regardless of what some ATRL members personal opinions might be, Emotion IS a critically acclaimed album. In fact, it's probably the most acclaimed pop album of the year.
It cracked in both Time and Vice top ten list of Best Albums of 2015. This is a remarkable feat for a pop record.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 22,877
|
Quote:
Originally posted by _Fey
as if yall need more reasons to stop using the gramma's as a credible source of quality
|
Pretty much this. The ignorance and delusion of people who try and shade Katy for Grammys still — it's like have you seen who and what has been winning these past few years? Dreadful mainstream, generic bops. The Grammys are a promotional tool that exist as a way to give authenticity to certain artists. They do not recognize quality, originality, music that challenges radio norms or anything polarizing.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 3,301
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Pedro
Grammys are horrible. They only care about relevant artists, never quality or talent.
|
.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/16/2011
Posts: 24,638
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Chanel.
But with the way they market themselves - with the general perception being that they nominate the "best" music, at least among the GP - you would think there would be more integrity to the process and more adherence (not absolute, but more) to critical opinions and fan-based opinions instead of commercial appeal.
It's very difficult to understand, or at least to reconcile with their image and marketing. I'd argue against your rather silly claim about Florence when general consensus has shown the same amount of support for both albums, and I'd point out that my problem lies exactly in Kelly and Mark's nominations. Neither deserves to even be mentioned in the same breath as the other three this year, in terms of quality, and an album like Emotion would fit much better into the category. The fact that you said anything about Taylor's success, much as I love her, is yet another problem, because that should have exactly nothing to do with it in theory. It's further proof that Grammy Awards are full of illegitimate nominations based on what names will get the Academy the most viewers and attention, rather than even attempting to nominate the best music (and I do think Taylor would still deserve a nom in the pop category).
What is a Grammy even worth if they're not going to nominate what anyone (since it's subjective) considers the best music, some of the most recognized and appreciated work of the year? What is it worth if your victory is only over this year's most famous pop starlet, a couple throwaway albums from people who are or used to be successful, and maybe one legitimate challenger? What is a nomination worth if in some case you have arguably a better album by all counts than someone else who happens to win because they were popular and will attract viewers? What is your album worth when you aren't even nominated, but you potentially had a better record according to critics and fans alike than any of the records that were nominated, all of which have some measure of greater commercial success or a reason they appeal to the GP?
The fact that any commercialism is considered and the fact that they clearly just want viewers for their TV slot should force them to change their marketing. They should not be regarded by anyone, especially the general public, to be the gold standard for musical achievement if this is how they operate. Maybe there should be a different award night hosted by some other entity to award music that is truly great, or that pushes boundaries, or that innovates, but right now I'm dissatisfied with how the Academy portrays itself when it's just an circle jerk by music execs and the biggest stars with the occasional "credibility-boosting" win like Beck.
|
Preach it
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/18/2012
Posts: 27,141
|
this is so sad Kelly ha trash album took up Carly's spot. Piece by Piece is a BAD album and Florence's album is atmost pop-adjascent. Mark Ronson's album has very little to offer beyond the lead single.
Carly deserved a nomination and its shame on the grammy committee that she wasnt recognized
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/17/2012
Posts: 33,611
|
Did anyone expect her to be nominated for one??
|
|
|
|
|