I don’t give a shit.

The only people who care are the players.  For the rest of us, it’s like listening to a parent complain about Little League baseball.

But the bottom line is, are the Grammys for the major labels and CBS or the players/members?

Since no one watches the endless pre-game, where they give a statuette to anyone who makes music, (really, if you can’t win a Grammy you truly suck), what difference does it make how many categories there are?  These minor awards are never going to make it to the mainstream, they’re never going to make it to the big show, so let the members have their fun, let them win an award like the five year old in the soccer league who never even got near the ball whenever the coach deigned to put him in.

Furthermore, if all it takes is an ad in the "New York Times" to influence the Grammys, that’s pitiful.  That means that money talks. Steve Stoute is no better than the rest of us.  Giving him influence is no different than allowing Goldman Sachs to write monetary policy.

Not that I think these moves by NARAS are corrupt or wrong…  I just think they don’t address the real issues.  It’s like major labels fighting P2P when the enemy is YouTube.  In other words, what is the FUTURE of the Grammys?

Is it about getting that payment from CBS ad infinitum?  Even though network TV means ever less and at some point the price paid is going to go down, at least in real dollars?

Or is it about the mission of NARAS…  Which is what again exactly?  Selling more major label records and lobbying in Congress on their behalf?

Neil Portnow is a cipher, not a leader.  It’s like everybody’s huddled in the wilderness with a flood roaring forth and no one’s standing on a rock saying GO THIS WAY!

NARAS could be so much more.  Could be about music as opposed to money.  Could focus on giving back to artists instead of ripping them off.  Yup, it’s all about the membership dues, and membership is going down.

Let’s make it like the Oscars.  Ten categories, no more.  Make it comprehensible.  As for those left out, boofuckinghoo.  Just because you make a YouTube video that doesn’t mean you get to go to the Kodak Theatre.  You don’t see the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences trying to cover the complete visual landscape, focusing on student movies and home movies and vacation movies and staycation movies…  If anything, they want to narrow the sphere and keep people out.

Now AMPAS has real issues.  But at least they know that having fewer awards makes an Oscar more meaningful to the winner and more comprehensible to the public.  Right now winning a Grammy is close to meaningless.  I guess that’s Steve Stoute’s point.  If you’re gonna try to appear all hip, why are you giving the awards to the unhip?  In other words, if you dress up like you’re gonna party with Snooki and JWoww and the Situation down at the Jersey shore but you insist they spin Benny Goodman and Connie Francis on the PA…WTF?

Record of the Year.  And it’s the same as the song, fuck you. They don’t split ’em when you hear ’em on the radio, why split ’em on the awards show?

And Best Female and Best Male and a few categories, Rock, Hip-Hop, you get five, figure it out, whittle it down.

And a Lifetime Achievement award.

And an Entertainer of the Year award, like they give out in the country world…

AND THAT’S IT!

If you were left out of the Grammys, if your category got cut, welcome to the real world.  At some point you’ve got to leave home and stand on your own.  Give the record stores credit, they’re fighting extinction with Record Store Day.  Create your own program, draw attention to yourself, don’t count on big bad dad to bail you out just so you can put "Grammy Winner" on the hype for your shows no one is gonna go to.

The Grammys’ cred goes up the fewer the awards they give out.  But going from 109 to 78 is like congratulating an obese person for going from 450 to 425.  It’s a step in the right direction, but you’ve still got a long way to go.

Let’s take this analogy further…

If you slim down to 425 it’s not gonna radicalize your dating life, you’re not gonna be swarmed by Ms. or Mr. Right.  But if you can get down to 150, then eyes will be upon you.

And I feel sorry for the obese.  Just like I feel sorry for those whose categories have been obliterated.  But the way you win is not by trying to convince everybody else to love you, to adore fat people and those playing music in genres few care about.  No, the way to get mass appeal is to slim down.  RADICALLY!

If you’re fat and you’re happy, you’ve got no problem.

But the Grammys are fat and no one’s happy.  Maybe a diet is not enough, maybe they need weight loss surgery.  Maybe they need a yearly co-president who’s actually an artist, like Eminem.  Someone to legitimize the shenanigans of these overpaid bozos who are more interested in keeping their jobs than doing what’s right.

NARAS doesn’t want change.  Just like the major labels don’t want change.  They want it the same as it ever was.

But give David Byrne credit.  He’s not touring with the Talking Heads anymore, he’s not playing to an ever-dwindling crowd via nostalgia.  Instead, he’s following his muse and striking off somewhere new.

And I’ve got no idea if Talking Heads’ "Once In A Lifetime" ever won a Grammy.  I highly doubt it.  It’s rare that reality and fantasy meet, rare that critical consensus and awards-givers agree.  I remember "Annie Hall" won Best Picture, because that thrilled me, it’s one of my favorite flicks ever.

But I’d have to think long and hard to name who won Record of the Year other than Bonnie Raitt twenty years back and the mistakes like Steely Dan and Herbie Hancock.

So there you have it.  A dose of truth.  Can you handle it?