And the Winner Isn't...

The Grammys were last night and I could not have watched less. I did see the Tracy Chapman/Luke Something cover of Fast Cover posted on social media, but I didn’t watch the ceremony because awards shows are boring and bad.

It’s not just the shows themselves, which tend to be meandering, self-congratulatory, pointlessly political, and overlong. Yes, I understand how an award can give a boost to an undervalued artist, but for the most part, these telecasts are nothing more than the gratuitous awarding of prizes to people who do not need any more prizes. They already won.

There’s also just too damned many, particularly when it comes to movies. Do we really need the Golden Globes, the Critics Choice Award, SAG-AFTRA awards, and the Oscars? We do not.

Which raises the question: do we need any of them?

It’s not just the shows themselves, which tend to be meandering, self-congratulatory, pointlessly political, and overlong. Yes, I understand how an award can give a boost to an undervalued artist, but for the most part, the ceremonies are the gratuitous awarding of prizes to people who do not need any more prizes. They already won.

What better image exists of award show vacuousness than a tuxedoed Paul Giamatti scarfing down a Double Double, Golden Globe perched among innumerable wadded-up paper napkins and cups of Diet Coke?

There’s also just too damned many, particularly when it comes to movies. Do we really need the Golden Globes, the Critics Choice Award, SAG-AFTRA awards, and the Oscars? Which raises the question: do we need any of them?

Awards are marketing gimmicks. Award shows are commercials. That is their raison d'être. They exist to generate money. I have no problem with money and I have no problem with awards in a general sense. What I have a problem with is treating art the same way we treat sports – not everything needs a winner or loser. The whole “it’s an honor to be nominated” is about as sincere as the Super Bowl-losing quarterback who praises the winning team.

There are any number of ways to measure artistic merit: commercial success, critical acclaim, originality, artistry. Whatever. Do we need trophies on top of all that? Do we need swag bags? Do we need a fashion show before each event? And do we need really need obsequious E! hosts badgering people on cheap red carpet?

Art is subjective. My Everything Everywhere All at Once is your Morbius. My It Takes A Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back is your Tortured Poets Department. (I know, I know, it’s not out yet but my Swiftian daughter texted me to let me know it’s on the way.) Art is a dialogue in a way that sports are not. It’s hard to argue with a final score, but easy to argue about the artistic merits of Barry Keoghan humping a freshly dug grave.

Would the Grammys be any worse if they were simply a celebration of the year in music? No acceptance speeches, no corny presenter banter, no accusations of “so and so got robbed.” Just great live music and maybe a few jokes. If you must have awards, do one or two lifetime achievement awards to celebrate people who have created a meaningful body of work. The record companies get everything they went out of the deal and the artists don’t have to pretend to be happy for anybody.

Of course, it’s harder to do that kind of show for movies and television since it’s not easy to perform a movie in the same way one can perform a song. My suggestion: eliminate all movie/TV awards shows except the Oscars and the Emmys. Combine them, get rid of most of the categories, keeping only the big ones, and make the winners accept their awards naked. Let’s see how badly they want those little trophies. Plus, let’s be honest, we’ve all looked up what most of these actors and actresses look like naked, anyway. I say, give the people what they want. If Jimmy Kimmel wants to host, he’s gonna host ‘nads out. Sorry.

I like the way the New York Times handles their book selections each year. “Notable Books” is such a great way to accomplish the same thing. Each year, they acknowledge 50 each of fiction and non-fiction. If one only read the books on those lists, it would be more than enough to keep one company for the rest of their days. Why can’t the Oscars do a “Notable Movies” telecast? I’d watch that.

I also like the Nobels but mostly because winners are almost always roused from sleep to receive the news and then they have to go to Sweden to collect their prize. In addition to being naked, I also propose that Oscar/Emmy winners have to go to Sweden or some other inconvenient locale. I’m just saying – make them work for it.

There may be those among you who believe that I only object to awards because I have never won one nor been nominated for any. Nor am I likely to ever win an award because I’m not particularly good at anything. You would be at least partially right to believe that; perhaps my poor attitude would change once I was the one being offered the swag bag, the free trip to Sweden, the opportunity to parade my sunken chest in front of a global audience. Maybe I’d be the biggest awards whore ever. Or maybe I’d continue recognizing their inherent poverty, emptiness, and the cynicism that surrounds them and the crass commercialism they represent. But probably I’d just be a whore.