Viewers of the 2005 Grammy Awards Sunday night were treated to a typical all-star gala, complete with collaborations between music idols, charity causes and the often-dreaded acceptance speeches. Although ratings were down by a significant number from last year’s ceremony, 18.8 million people still watched the likes of the Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony duet with each other and punk-rock icons Green Day test the censors with their performance of “American Idiot.”
Viewers also witnessed the late Ray Charles collect eight Grammys for his last album, “Genius Loves Company,” in which he performed duets with such artists as Elton John and Norah Jones. The final award of the evening – album of the year – put an exclamation on an already stellar night for the late “Genius of Soul.”
But was “Genius Loves Company” truly deserving of being named album of the year, or were Grammy voters simply voting with their hearts instead of their ears?
Charles had a fantastic career, one that spanned decades and spawned over 60 albums. There is no debating the fact that his influence on music is far-reaching and will permeate throughout the industry for many years to come.
It is also true that “Genius Loves Company” has sold over two million copies to date, making it the best-selling album in Charles’ catalogue.
But is it worthy to be called album of the year? That argument is a hard one to make. It is a nice sentiment, and Charles’ old manager was nearly reduced to tears while accepting the award at the podium. But giving the Grammy to Charles because of sentimental feelings, as a de facto lifetime achievement award, instead of on its sheer musical quality is a slap in the face to the legacy he has left behind.
Charles was not the only musician to earn an award that seemed to be influenced by good vibes (or vibrations). Former Beach Boy Brian Wilson received a Grammy for best rock instrumental performance for “Mrs. O’Leary’s Cow,” taken from his long-delayed “SMiLE” album. It marked the first time Wilson had been awarded any hardware from the Grammys in his 42-year career. Ironically enough, the instrumental award went to a man who has done as much as anyone to advance the cause of harmonic – not instrumental – music.
Everyone wants to see his or her hero and favorite artist receive critical acclaim, especially after years of being snubbed by the committee. But by giving such artists awards simply because we want to see them win as opposed to recognizing the most talented artists, these artists are being given backhanded compliments.
The members of the Grammy committee need to purge themselves of these sentimental feelings or find new jobs. If an artist wins an award, it should be because they are truly deserving of it and not because the artist in question is long overdue of recognition.
