Am I the only one that thinks these award shows are incredibly stupid, ridiculous, and indicative of nothing more than who "wins" the marketing extras?
I particularly find the Grammys to be an example of what is "best" being totally random and unrelated to any standard I can identify, and have thought so since the early '70's.
The Oscars are a little more predictable, mostly based on Hollywood politics and electioneering, but going back to the '30's have got it "wrong" more often than the weather.
Others like Emmys, Tonys, Golden Globes, all just seem silly.
Unlike most sports, where you score the most points,get to the finish line fastest, jump higher, throw further, or lift more weight, I don't see how you score "art".
I have a simple rule: Does it entertain me? Yes--I consider it "good art". No--I consider it wasting my time. Whether it's a pre-Renaissance painting, "Classical" music, a shoot-em-up movie, a heavy drama, Jazz, Rock, Hip-hop, literature, etc. Am I entertained or bored? Do I want to continue or move on to something else? In other words: Does the artist say something to me that interests me, whether I understand it or not, like it or not? Or am I simply bored or repulsed?
The Grammys: Who Cares?
1"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."
from Kentucky!