Beyonce wins Album Of The Year at the Grammys

[Roughhouse Dandy 10,080]

The woman crossed into a genre whose notable artists showed open contempt for her. She made an album that showcased where country came from, where it is, and where it could go in the future while telling us where she came from, where she is, and potentially where she's going in the future. She brought along legends to cosign, other artists who have crossed over to the genre, and put a spotlight on up-and-coming Black artists in the space. She spoke on her personal life, her family, and the sociopolitical state of the country. She meshed the genre with rock and roll, americana, folk, hip hop, rap, r&b, bounce, and opera. She started conversations about the roots of the culture, instruments, and legends like Linda Martell. Even got her her first and only grammy nom. The album is bookended like an essay, has tracks melting into each other, and transitions into her previous album. The project has already raised money for the community, inspired a college course, and kickstarted more than one documentary. There is so much more effort and so many more actual layers than most other projects nominated this year (and past ones that have won too).

I understand that it's not everyone's cup of tea, but trying to invalidate the work and the win is crazy. 

[salty like sodium 1,138]

9 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

It's not hard to find out. A simple Wiki search is all you need. I always check the records before and after every ceremony. Look up "Grammy Awards" and then on the left panel, click on "leading winners" and then "Grammy award milestones." It will chronicle the top names in every category of records from most nominated, most won, youngest/oldest nominee, most decorated album, etc. When you flick through the names of most nominated and awarded, you will see an abundance of black artists. If you've never heard of them, hover over their name to see their photo. 

The problem you describe for Beyonce is not unique to her or black artists. It happens to just about everyone. Gaga's been stuck in pop music all her days, Lana was stuck in pop and finally got relegated to alternative, the re-categorised Justin's Changes album to pop when he submitted it under RnB and basically, it's extremely hard for white popstars to break out out of the pop category. That segregation actually harms their chances of winning, not improves because pop categories are super competitive and are mostly won by who's the newest name. Beyonce, by comparison, has been given free rein to compete in just about every category - RnB, pop, urban contemporary, rap, melodic rap, dance/electronic, rock, country and americana. I wish Gaga's music would be respectfully categorised like that and she could get 7 songs from the same album nominated. Beyonce literally gets special treatment in this regard. I don't see any other artist whose music is widely nominated under various categories and includes non-singles. It's like the academy want her to get recognised for being nominated in as many categories as possible even when it really doesn't fit. Levi's Jeans was put under pop even though it definitely isn't. And it really doesn't matter what categories black artists are winning, a Grammy is a Grammy (a lot of the producers are winning broadly though). I wouldn't care if Gaga only won pop Grammys, I just want her to win something and she's never won a general field category. Is it no longer racism when it happens to white artists? 

I don't know why you don't care about the nationality issue. Is it because being American, it doesn't affect you? Well, it bothers me. I'm British and a lot of our biggest and most respected acts don't even get nominated for Grammys. There are international acts who have critically acclaimed albums by American publications but they don't get Grammys. And I hate the BRITS, I don't like how they're called the British Grammys, they're really not. They don't have enough categories, their choices are usually heavily based on commercial performance, their choices are heavily biased, it's all a mess. The Grammys are the biggest representation of music and artists in terms of categories and trying to accept everyone but they're still sorely lacking. They may be an American ceremony but they're meant to represent the best music globally. Rarely happens. 

I don't care if Beyonce has a lot of her peers supporting her. It doesn't mean they're right. Taste is subjective. I've listened to all her albums and the only ones that I thought were anywhere near good were her debut, 4, self-titled and Lemonade. She has some really good songs on every album but as a whole body of work, not really above average. The only real standouts on CC were American Requiem, Jolene, Daughter and Ya Ya, none of which actually won Grammys. But as I said before, she's won the big one now. Hopefully, she can stop being treated like an underrated genius who hasn't got her flowers and maybe start hyping up Gaga for her long-awaited AOTY win now, considering she's been nominated almost as many times but never won (and got completely snubbed for ASIB). 

 

Thanks for the wikipedia lesson, I'm glad people in 2024 still believe others don't know how it works.  I'm glad you believe 7/21 and 6/17 is "an abundance", but the reality is that that sits between 33-35% and is probably representative of the demographics within the industry as a whole.

The reason Beyoncé has been "given free reign" as you put it to compete in so many categories is because she actually put in the work to sing across so many different genres in her career... Aside from Renaissance and Cowboy Carter which are both albums dedicated to brand-new genres she'd never really done in that way before Lemonade was full of a variety of genres as well, Black is King was an afrobeats project, she did a whole rap album with Jay-Z, a whole concept album that was half ballads half pop tracks... It's not just "one track" in a sea of other tracks and so there's more material for the committee to review when deciding who to nominate, it's simple science.

As a category, "Pop" is the most non-descript category as possible, where almost everything can fit into it. Name any other category that could include all Poker Face (Gaga), Hello (Adele), and Work (Rihanna) ... Saying all those songs are pop but not Levii's Jeans is quite the stretch.

"A grammy is a grammy". No it's not ... The "big 4" awards are called "big 4" for a reason — it's because they're considered the most important and prestigious awards of the ceremony. It's like saying a best supporting actor Oscar is as a good as a best lead actor Oscar...

"Is it no longer racism when it happens to white artists?"

Excuse me?  You did NOT just say that.  White artists win all the time, how could it be racism if one white artist loses to another white artist?  Did you seriously say that?  In 2010 she lost AOTY to Taylor Swift, in 2011 to Arcade Fire, in 2012 to Adele, and in 2022 (with L4S, which somehow got nominated for AOTY despite barely anyone listing to it) she lost to Jon Batiste, who is a black artist. But 75% of her losses were against white artists so how dare you even ask this question? Also half of these were lost to other women, so you also can't fault sexism either... If anything Gaga suffers from the academy's general disdain of pop and dance music.

It's ironic you assume I'm American just because I disagree with you. Girl, I'm british too. I live in the UK. The reason I don't care about the nationality issue is because I believe as a culture we have evolved beyond our belief in the British's divine right to colonize the world.  I'm sure a lot of most respected and biggest American artists don't get nominated at the Brit awards. That's just how these things go. The Grammy awards are an American ceremony designed to promote and generate revenue for the American music industry. It makes sense they will favor and prioritise their own artists. Also not you acting like Adele doesn't win most of her nominations (16 wins/25 noms = 64% victory rate, which is enormous), Charli XCX has won 3/10 noms, the beatles were nominated 25 times (and won 8 times), Paul McCartney 19/83 (!!) including an AOTY, Dua Lipa also has 3/10, Elton John 5/35... Notice anything though? Most of the british artists who get nominated are white. 

I know you live in the UK but that's not really an excuse to not have a basic awareness of the deep-rooted institutional racism in the US that is a byproduct of our country's colonial legacy where the UK exported slaves to the US and let them be treated as such, even allowing a constitution to be written that decreed that Black people were less human that white people, which led to legal segregation that was only abolished in 1964, 60 years ago, which means people to this day are still experiencing and living with the consequences of that loaded history. It's a completely different country to the UK, where police brutality is just one example of how the past has tainted the present, and award shows is another (much less severe example, but still important).

As per the Grammy website, their mission is to:

ADVOCATE: We fight for the rights of all music creators and ensure pro-music policy at the national, state and local levels.

At no point do they mention being an international affair. The majority of the voting pool is American, the event is based in the US... This is not like the Eurovision or the Olympic Games so we should not expect it to be the same. 

I'm glad we've established your tastes as a GGD member are somehow superior to those of the very artists we know, love and chat about here, but unfortunately I think that's possibly the hottest take of the day. We'll be sure to pass on your feedback to Beyoncé though, I'm sure she was desperately awaiting your thoughts... And none of Beyoncé's songs won Grammy's this year, except for a duet (which is different from solo songs since there aren't that many duets to begin with compared to solo songs, so those categories are also less competitive...)

Anyway, I'm done on this, you do you but I've said my piece. Congrats to Beyoncé for a well-deserved award, no matter what random GGD users might feel entitled to believe. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,451]

9 hours ago, salty like sodium said:

Thanks for the wikipedia lesson, I'm glad people in 2024 still believe others don't know how it works.  I'm glad you believe 7/21 and 6/17 is "an abundance", but the reality is that that sits between 33-35% and is probably representative of the demographics within the industry as a whole.

The reason Beyoncé has been "given free reign" as you put it to compete in so many categories is because she actually put in the work to sing across so many different genres in her career... Aside from Renaissance and Cowboy Carter which are both albums dedicated to brand-new genres she'd never really done in that way before Lemonade was full of a variety of genres as well, Black is King was an afrobeats project, she did a whole rap album with Jay-Z, a whole concept album that was half ballads half pop tracks... It's not just "one track" in a sea of other tracks and so there's more material for the committee to review when deciding who to nominate, it's simple science.

As a category, "Pop" is the most non-descript category as possible, where almost everything can fit into it. Name any other category that could include all Poker Face (Gaga), Hello (Adele), and Work (Rihanna) ... Saying all those songs are pop but not Levii's Jeans is quite the stretch.

"A grammy is a grammy". No it's not ... The "big 4" awards are called "big 4" for a reason — it's because they're considered the most important and prestigious awards of the ceremony. It's like saying a best supporting actor Oscar is as a good as a best lead actor Oscar...

"Is it no longer racism when it happens to white artists?"

Excuse me?  You did NOT just say that.  White artists win all the time, how could it be racism if one white artist loses to another white artist?  Did you seriously say that?  In 2010 she lost AOTY to Taylor Swift, in 2011 to Arcade Fire, in 2012 to Adele, and in 2022 (with L4S, which somehow got nominated for AOTY despite barely anyone listing to it) she lost to Jon Batiste, who is a black artist. But 75% of her losses were against white artists so how dare you even ask this question? Also half of these were lost to other women, so you also can't fault sexism either... If anything Gaga suffers from the academy's general disdain of pop and dance music.

It's ironic you assume I'm American just because I disagree with you. Girl, I'm british too. I live in the UK. The reason I don't care about the nationality issue is because I believe as a culture we have evolved beyond our belief in the British's divine right to colonize the world.  I'm sure a lot of most respected and biggest American artists don't get nominated at the Brit awards. That's just how these things go. The Grammy awards are an American ceremony designed to promote and generate revenue for the American music industry. It makes sense they will favor and prioritise their own artists. Also not you acting like Adele doesn't win most of her nominations (16 wins/25 noms = 64% victory rate, which is enormous), Charli XCX has won 3/10 noms, the beatles were nominated 25 times (and won 8 times), Paul McCartney 19/83 (!!) including an AOTY, Dua Lipa also has 3/10, Elton John 5/35... Notice anything though? Most of the british artists who get nominated are white. 

I know you live in the UK but that's not really an excuse to not have a basic awareness of the deep-rooted institutional racism in the US that is a byproduct of our country's colonial legacy where the UK exported slaves to the US and let them be treated as such, even allowing a constitution to be written that decreed that Black people were less human that white people, which led to legal segregation that was only abolished in 1964, 60 years ago, which means people to this day are still experiencing and living with the consequences of that loaded history. It's a completely different country to the UK, where police brutality is just one example of how the past has tainted the present, and award shows is another (much less severe example, but still important).

As per the Grammy website, their mission is to:

ADVOCATE: We fight for the rights of all music creators and ensure pro-music policy at the national, state and local levels.

At no point do they mention being an international affair. The majority of the voting pool is American, the event is based in the US... This is not like the Eurovision or the Olympic Games so we should not expect it to be the same. 

I'm glad we've established your tastes as a GGD member are somehow superior to those of the very artists we know, love and chat about here, but unfortunately I think that's possibly the hottest take of the day. We'll be sure to pass on your feedback to Beyoncé though, I'm sure she was desperately awaiting your thoughts... And none of Beyoncé's songs won Grammy's this year, except for a duet (which is different from solo songs since there aren't that many duets to begin with compared to solo songs, so those categories are also less competitive...)

Anyway, I'm done on this, you do you but I've said my piece. Congrats to Beyoncé for a well-deserved award, no matter what random GGD users might feel entitled to believe. 

There was no need to be cheeky, plenty of people don't know how to find out this stuff and expect to be directed to it. A lot of them certainly haven't researched it to know what they're saying isn't actually accurate either. I'm referring to a lot more than just the number of artists in most nominated and awarded categories, I'm also meaning the ones who feature in various records. Most of the most awarded albums are by black or mixed artists as well. I don't know what kind of figures will be acceptable for you but it's certainly not barely any like most people like to make out. You seem to be unsatisfied by anything I show you anyway.

My whole point is that Beyonce can make songs of other genres and she actually gets appropriately categorised. The academy seems to get it when she does it but not when other artists do it, they just keep them stuck in the genres they've been in since day one regardless of what different things they try out. Name another artist who got 7 songs (5 of whom weren't even singles) from the same album nominated at the same ceremony across a range of genres. That's a type of special treatment I've never seen before. Pop is a clear-cut genre for me, it's such an outdated concept to believe it just means "popular." Levii's Jeans is a mixture of country and RnB, it even features a rapper. There's no soul category, but if there was, Adele's music should be in that and if there was a dancehall category, Work would be in that. There aren't enough categories, so stuff that isn't even pop gets put into pop and it's not fair. There needs to be a fusion category too. 

Actually, a supporting Oscar is as good as a lead Oscar. Supporting doesn't mean you weren't as good as the lead, it just means you got less screentime. In some cases, the supporting cast can be better than the lead. Grammys are no different. Yes, we all want to win the big 4, but winning them doesn't rank you higher than someone who hasn't. 

You totally misunderstood my point about the racism thing. I meant "if this exact same situation happens to whites too, then how can it be racism?" There are so many situations that I've seen cited as racist even though it's happened to me and other white people I know, so racism is not always the reason behind every piece of ill treatment. I find it tends to be sexism more often than not. Beyonce's music is such a fusion these days that it's hard to make it appeal across the board, which has been her biggest obstacle.

You were talking as if you were American up until that point and didn't say anything about being British, so what was I supposed to assume? Usually, Brits are the first to complain that it's so hard for our own to win Grammys, so...I can't believe you said that bit about believing Brits have the divine right to colonize the world. If you think that's what I meant, you couldn't be more wrong. I meant that we have produced some of the biggest and most influential acts in the world but the Grammys are hard to win for us. You named the ones who have but as you can see, they've barely won any, Charli just won for the first time in all these years (and may not win again), but you miss out that Kate Bush, Queen, etc have never won. And actually, the biggest American acts do get nominated and win BRITS. But they don't truly get it as they won't even nominate Gaga anymore, even when Shallow was one of the biggest hits here. They hate her for some reason, probably why their views have been dropping every year. I never said that Adele barely won any nominations, I've frequently said she's won a lot. 

I understand the history of racism in the US, I'm just saying that it doesn't affect awards ceremonies today like people would like to believe. There's a lot of issues and bias with who gets nominated and wins but racism is not the issue.

And the Grammys claim that they celebrate music from all over the world, it's an American ceremony, but it's meant to be for everyone, that's why they have categories like Latin Global & Reggae where basically everyone is non-American. They're not meant to just be about Americans. I've never seen a Brit be happy with how they do things because they frequently snub our artists.

I don't think my views should be seen as superior. I've never said that either. I mean that our own opinions about music are the most important and we shouldn't let it be influenced by artists. Just because they're talented doesn't mean their taste is superior. Gaga said she loved Fiona Apple's album but I hated it. I love Gaga but find her taste questionable sometimes. It's odd when people believe "this talented artist thinks this artist is good so they must be." Music is designed to be subjective and life would be boring if we all felt the same.

[Roughhouse Dandy 10,080]

22 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Name another artist who got 7 songs (5 of whom weren't even singles) from the same album nominated at the same ceremony across a range of genres.

Babes, there's a whole monologue on the album talking explicitly about how the record covers a range of genres and then it does. If another artist did that I'm sure the powers that control it would be sure to note it and act accordingly. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,451]

29 minutes ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

Babes, there's a whole monologue on the album talking explicitly about how the record covers a range of genres and then it does. If another artist did that I'm sure the powers that control it would be sure to note it and act accordingly. 

You really think so? Once Gaga was moved out of electronic into pop, that's where she stayed, even though some of her songs could be nominated under electronic and americana. I've never seen any other fusion album get this wide amount of nominations. Have you ever seen an artist get nominated for so many non-single songs? Beyonce started that and she's the only one who truly gets album tracks nominations. I wouldn't mind if they did it for everyone but they don't. 

[Roughhouse Dandy 10,080]

2 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

You really think so? Once Gaga was moved out of electronic into pop, that's where she stayed, even though some of her songs could be nominated under electronic and americana. I've never seen any other fusion album get this wide amount of nominations. Have you ever seen an artist get nominated for so many non-single songs? Beyonce started that and she's the only one who truly gets album tracks nominations. I wouldn't mind if they did it for everyone but they don't. 

I think if they literally spelled it out in their projects like Beyoncé did, they'd have a better chance of it happening for them. Not saying that should be necessary though; that's just what Bey did and why I think Cowboy Carter got that treatment. And I haven't paid attention to the Grammys beyond the performances, fashion, and the noms for artists I follow so I can't answer your second question. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,451]

7 minutes ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

I think if they literally spelled it out in their projects like Beyoncé did, they'd have a better chance of it happening for them. Not saying that should be necessary though; that's just what Bey did and why I think Cowboy Carter got that treatment. And I haven't paid attention to the Grammys beyond the performances, fashion, and the noms for artists I follow so I can't answer your second question. 

Oh please. It doesn't matter what an artist says, the academy have the final say. Justin tried to submit his Changes album under RnB but the academy re-categorised him under pop. He even tweeted at them, saying he had nothing against pop but that wasn't what he was trying to do here, it was a clear attempt at an RnB album. Didn't change their minds. Absolutely it shouldn't be necessary to spell it out, music critics should know their genres and categorise without being told what it is. She only made a point of saying that on this album, yet she still got nominations across the board before she started saying it. Well, take the word of someone who researches nominations for all artists and I can tell you that once the Grammys have decided what genre you make, you're pretty much stuck in that category for life unless you do something radically different and even then, it can be hard. Nicki didn't get any nominations for Roman Reloaded likely because the academy couldn't work out if it was a pop or rap album as it's literally 50/50 (you can see why I want there to be a fusion award), Taylor had to make an official announcement to stop being nominated in country when she switched to pop and Kacey Musgraves, despite winning AOTY, had a controversy over her Star Crossed album where the academy couldn't decide if it was pop or country so barely gave her any nominations. That's just a few of many. And the song has to be a single to get a nomination in 95% of cases. I'm sure its not happened for your faves. As I said, when Beyonce does it, it gets understood, it's special treatment. She's rumoured to have act iii be a rock project. So expect nominations in rock, alternative and americana in the 2027 Grammys, just you wait. 

[Roughhouse Dandy 10,080]

6 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Oh please. It doesn't matter what an artist says, the academy have the final say. Justin tried to submit his Changes album under RnB but the academy re-categorised him under pop. He even tweeted at them, saying he had nothing against pop but that wasn't what he was trying to do here, it was a clear attempt at an RnB album. Didn't change their minds. Absolutely it shouldn't be necessary to spell it out, music critics should know their genres and categorise without being told what it is. She only made a point of saying that on this album, yet she still got nominations across the board before she started saying it. Well, take the word of someone who researches nominations for all artists and I can tell you that once the Grammys have decided what genre you make, you're pretty much stuck in that category for life unless you do something radically different and even then, it can be hard. Nicki didn't get any nominations for Roman Reloaded likely because the academy couldn't work out if it was a pop or rap album as it's literally 50/50 (you can see why I want there to be a fusion award), Taylor had to make an official announcement to stop being nominated in country when she switched to pop and Kacey Musgraves, despite winning AOTY, had a controversy over her Star Crossed album where the academy couldn't decide if it was pop or country so barely gave her any nominations. That's just a few of many. And the song has to be a single to get a nomination in 95% of cases. I'm sure its not happened for your faves. As I said, when Beyonce does it, it gets understood, it's special treatment. She's rumoured to have act iii be a rock project. So expect nominations in rock, alternative and americana in the 2027 Grammys, just you wait. 

So Taylor made a big thing out of it and she got what she wanted. That's exactly what I was talking about. I don't think it's special treatment; I think it's the artist making a public point that urges the Grammy people's hand. 

If Beyoncé does rock, I hope her nominations (if she gets them) reflect that. As I do with any other artist switching genres from their regular one. 

But it sounds like you're a lot more emotionally invested in this than I am, so you think however you wanna think about it. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,451]

6 minutes ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

So Taylor made a big thing out of it and she got what she wanted. That's exactly what I was talking about. I don't think it's special treatment; I think it's the artist making a public point that urges the Grammy people's hand. 

If Beyoncé does rock, I hope her nominations (if she gets them) reflect that. As I do with any other artist switching genres from their regular one. 

But it sounds like you're a lot more emotionally invested in this than I am, so you think however you wanna think about it. 

Taylor's announcement was actually a plea to the CMAs as she felt it was weird to still be nominated for country just because that's where she started. The Grammys just followed suit, you couldn't deny this was pop she was making now anyway. But when she made folk albums, she wasn't nominated under folk even though I think it genuinely could be considered that. And for all that the academy love her, she doesn't get album track nominations like Beyonce does. It can actually be looked at as a diss to the academy to say which genre you want to be in so publicly, it can come across bratty and like you're saying they don't know what they're doing. I mean, Jay says last year at the awards that it's wrong that she still doesn't have AOTY, this year, she wins it. I mean...special treatment couldn't be clearer. The Grammys listen to powerful people.

[Roughhouse Dandy 10,080]

16 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

The Grammys listen to powerful people.

Taylor is literally nicknamed "the music industry" though. She's powerful and yet apparently they didn't listen to her when she made folk music, so somethings not adding up here. 

If Taylor put in public effort for her folky songs to be considered in the folk category, maybe it would have happened. I'm just not seeing the special treatment you think you're seeing.