Will Katy Perry ever win a Grammy?

[DeanWinchester 41,390]

1 hour ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I'm talking about critical praise in general, not just from the Grammys. After BTW, all she got was mixed reviews for AP, C2C and Joanne. Why did the critics fall out of love?

I'm guessing ARTPOP really muddled their perception on her image and brand as a whole.

She's going to take a lot of climbing out to return to her status as critics' darling. What makes it difficult is we don't know if critics want her to return to EDM or to continue branching out. And critics aren't always on the same boat.

[androiduser 7,438]

well, in his entire career David Bowie won only one Grammy, in 1985 (for best video), and he had been completely ignored 1984, without any nominations.

So, I think Katy is on the right side of the Grammy statistics.

[StrawberryBlond 14,881]

19 hours ago, A Gaga Lad said:

I'm guessing ARTPOP really muddled their perception on her image and brand as a whole.

She's going to take a lot of climbing out to return to her status as critics' darling. What makes it difficult is we don't know if critics want her to return to EDM or to continue branching out. And critics aren't always on the same boat.

If that's the case, that's typically sexist. They love praising men for doing something different and call them geniuses and a master of all trades. When a woman does it, she's getting ideas above her station, she's believing her own hype, she's having an identity crisis, she's throwing ideas at the wall in the hope that something sticks, she doesn't know who she is as an artist. Unless you're Taylor freaking Swift, of course.

You're right, we don't know what the critics want of her and we can't ask them. They'd just change their minds anyway, according to what the public think of her at the time. I'm hoping that the SB might make them clean their ears out and realise that she's an artist worthy of respect. But I disagree with your sentiment that critics aren't always in the same boat. The only one you can say that about is Robert Christgau (he dances to the beat of his own drum, good or bad) and to an exttent, Slant Magazine (who are usually the voice of reason and are stricter than the majority of critics nowadays). But other than them, all critics submit roughly the same star rating and opinion. Because like I said, they're sheep.

19 hours ago, androiduser said:

well, in his entire career David Bowie won only one Grammy, in 1985 (for best video), and he had been completely ignored 1984, without any nominations.

So, I think Katy is on the right side of the Grammy statistics.

I didn't know that. It's moments like these that make me grateful for what Gaga has achieved against the odds. But at the same time, it makes it 100% clear that the academy base their nominations on commercial performance most of the time. The winners may be based on artistic merit, but not the nominations.

[bloody g 31,746]

Of course she will.

Eventually... 

[SilkSpectre0 547]

On 02/12/2016 at 6:56 PM, StrawberryBlond said:

If that's the case, that's typically sexist. They love praising men for doing something different and call them geniuses and a master of all trades. When a woman does it, she's getting ideas above her station, she's believing her own hype, she's having an identity crisis, she's throwing ideas at the wall in the hope that something sticks, she doesn't know who she is as an artist. Unless you're Taylor freaking Swift, of course.

You're right, we don't know what the critics want of her and we can't ask them. They'd just change their minds anyway, according to what the public think of her at the time. I'm hoping that the SB might make them clean their ears out and realise that she's an artist worthy of respect. But I disagree with your sentiment that critics aren't always in the same boat. The only one you can say that about is Robert Christgau (he dances to the beat of his own drum, good or bad) and to an exttent, Slant Magazine (who are usually the voice of reason and are stricter than the majority of critics nowadays). But other than them, all critics submit roughly the same star rating and opinion. Because like I said, they're sheep.

I didn't know that. It's moments like these that make me grateful for what Gaga has achieved against the odds. But at the same time, it makes it 100% clear that the academy base their nominations on commercial performance most of the time. The winners may be based on artistic merit, but not the nominations.

You're so right. For some reason critics find it easier to view male artists as multidimensional. They'll recognise their new efforts without calling them a hypocrit or fake and praise them for having so many sides. If a female artist changes anything she's either trying too hard or insincere etc because it's not identical to what they did before and then they try to figure out 'why she's changed' ummm maybe it's just another part of themselves ? 

[StrawberryBlond 14,881]

43 minutes ago, SilkSpectre0 said:

You're so right. For some reason critics find it easier to view male artists as multidimensional. They'll recognise their new efforts without calling them a hypocrit or fake and praise them for having so many sides. If a female artist changes anything she's either trying too hard or insincere etc because it's not identical to what they did before and then they try to figure out 'why she's changed' ummm maybe it's just another part of themselves ? 

Yeah, apparently male artists are multi-faceted beings who are naturally inclined to visit as many different avenues of music as they wish. But when a female does it, there's outrage that she isn't doing what's expected of her. I mean, critics are supposed to be music lovers, right? So, why are they so determined to put artists in a designated genre and don't want them to break out of it? It's one thing to criticise an artist if they've put out a sub-standard take on another genre or completely butchered it. But if they've collaborated with professionals in the genre, worked really hard, understand and respect the genre and make a good go of every song, what's with all the harshness? Another user here actually said that critics still don't seem to understand that Gaga's music has always been a hybrid of a lot of different ideas, which is why it can lack cohesiveness, meaning that their criticism of her lack of focus doesn't stand. Do they praise her for having songs rich with various musical elements? Creating an album that transcends genres? Having a musical style that sets her apart from everyone else? No, they say that she just isn't sure of who she is as an artist and is being insincere. God, what do they teach in music courses at university these days? If they're teaching 'cohesive - good, non-cohesive - bad,' the curriculum really needs a rethink.

Yes, there's so much article space devoted to why they've changed that there isn't much room for a review of the actual music! There's a sense of not so much 'why have you changed?' but 'How dare you change!' among critics. It's no wonder Xtina only has one album (Back To Basics) that got properly praised because she changes with every album and the critics don't know how to handle it. I am flabbergasted at how much they slammed Stripped back in the day. They called it a misguided mess, all over the place, that it had a lack of musical concentration, that it was "the sound of an artist who was given too much freedom too early and had no idea what to do with it." Luckily, the public really showed the critics up on that one, giving her mega million sales and awards and made the album a classic. And naturally, the critics gave her follow-up much better reviews. Because we can't have anyone thinking they're fools who think the public made the wrong choice, do we?

[Red Velvet 10,988]

On 28 November 2016 at 10:49 PM, Kesha said:

I don't know I've always wondered why 

i really hope her and Kesha win a Grammy with their new music 

And Ariana's