IT IS GRAMMY NIGHT!!

WOW! I just read the Chicago Trib and they have an article about the Grammys that pretty much is exactly what I have been saying!

He said if Taylor's CD had only sold an average about of CDs she would not even have been nominated let alone win anything! He also said she sings flatter than a pancake.

I am going to see if there is a link to the story and bring it here!

Well I agree with that article, right on the money.

I agree with Adam about Carrie's dress it looked like was made at the gift wrap department with leftover ribbons.

Carrie didn't need a dazzling dress. She had her million dollar engagement ring that everyone would be looking at instead.

Was it really one million dollars??!!! I would be scared to death I'd lose it! Mine was $4,500 and I freak out every time I take it off even after 23 years!!

I hate to say this, but I cringed when I heard Adam dissing the women's clothing choices. He's a singer, not a fashion critic. Then there was his hair.

People who live in glass houses ...

Anyway, what I'm saying is that, for myself, I think Adam is a great singer. If he's not careful, that fact is going to get lost in ... the glitter and the bitchiness.

Hope I'm wrong.

You have a good point NN. It's nice seeing Adam in the public eye, but I wondered about their choice to have him critique fashion. Now my next remark may be 'way out there', but I'll go with it anyway........... Did they select him for this because he's-- pretty, always looks fashionable, popular, or gay?

Well, to be fair he had no choice but to pick a worst dress. He had to. They do it every time and on all the entertainment news shows.

Why was he asked? Not sure. I do think it was a combo of things - but gay I do believe was taken into consideration. That bugs - but what can you do. Frankly, even though he was charming and delightful, I hated the gig. I'm glad he was there. I'm glad he had a great time and met cool people like Ringo, but I hated that he was asked for that gig.

The hair - that's a nightmare I wish to forget.

I'm relieved to read that I am not alone!!

I do think the fact that he is gay--and really "out there" gay--is playing into these "opportunities."

I really dislike all the sensationalism that pretends to be entertainment. :(

Yeah, the hair was not so good. I also thought he had a bit too much make up on too, or maybe the wrong shade.

I think what bothers me the most is that he was asked because he is gay like Cojo. I could be wrong - but I think that played a huge part in his being asked. That bothers me because it is stereotyping of the most blatant kind. Sadly, he seemed to play right into it. Well, sadly for me. He loves fashion and the female performers and the arts etc. so he may have just LOVED every ding dang second of it. I personally would rather not see him do that sort of gig again. But that's just me.

Firecracker wrote:

I think what bothers me the most is that he was asked because he is gay like Cojo. I could be wrong - but I think that played a huge part in his being asked. That bothers me because it is stereotyping of the most blatant kind. Sadly, he seemed to play right into it. Well, sadly for me. He loves fashion and the female performers and the arts etc. so he may have just LOVED every ding dang second of it. I personally would rather not see him do that sort of gig again. But that's just me.

You are not alone. We do NOT need another Cojo. Ugh.

I have nothing against Cojo. He is funny and that is his thing - fashion. But Adam is one hell of an awesome singer and performer and for me this gig seemed, well, weird since he is not a fashion critic. I would have much preferred he just interview the artists about the music and the show.

I'm with ya........that's why I mentioned I thought maybe because he was gay and out there right now, is why he was asked to do this. I didn't like it all that much, not that I didn't like seeing Adam, I just thought it was a 'step down'.............

Frankly, I saw it as a way for him to be "a part of the Grammys" even though he wasn't performing or presenting. The performers are always people nominated - with a few special guests sometimes. Not many presenters on the telecast since so few awards are actually given on air. So this way he got to be a part of it all and get paid and screen time.

But yeah, seemed a step off to the side.

Sky wrote:

You have a good point NN. It's nice seeing Adam in the public eye, but I wondered about their choice to have him critique fashion. Now my next remark may be 'way out there', but I'll go with it anyway........... Did they select him for this because he's-- pretty, always looks fashionable, popular, or gay?

I think it was because he is pretty and gay. Mind you Cujo isn't exactly pretty and he's been successful at it for years. There seems to be this stereotype that to be a fashion critic you need to be female or gay. Adam does play right into it though with all the glam. He should be able to be who he is and wants to be but he can be who he is without all the wild hair and overdone makeup. He looked spectacular at the CCA's (FY's avy).

I do believe that he accepted this gig to be involved at the Grammy's, to be an insider. Simply walking the Red Carpet he probably wasn't going to get to meet many of those he did with ET. It was a nice one time gig but not something I want to see from him again.

Quote :

It was a nice one time gig but not something I want to see from him again.

I agree, one time is enough.

Firecracker wrote:

My comment about "art" had nothing to do with people's tastes or musical preferences. It had to do with The Grammys should NOT be about sales but about the art! The Billboards are strictly based on sales and that is fine. That is what they are for and about. The sales should not be a factor in what makes for "the best album" or "the best vocal performance". THAT should be about the art. Otherwise all wonderful and talented artists who are not as well known or popular with a huge push from a major label are automatically excluded from consideration and THAT is wrong.

A BEST album should be just that - a BEST album. Not a best SELLING album.

So that is what I meant. And frankly I don't believe for one second that artistically "Fearless" was the very best album put out last year. I doubt it was even the best country album.

I always assumed your label or management paid for you to attend the Grammys as a way to help promote you. If it is THAT expensive to go if you are not a performer or presenter than how could someone like Alexis Grace afford it? From what I remember she was a struggling single mom without a record contract.

Like I said I think he was exaggerating about the thousand of dollars but I do believe they would be in the hundreds. For Kris it would be expensive cause if he would of gone he would take Katy. For he and her,(in a gorgeous outfit), it could get mighty expensive. If the label is supposed to pay then Jive doesn't like sending their artist. Kris, Alli, Jordin and David A. were all absent from the Grammy's and I honestly don't think I have ever seen David A. there. Jordin could of been there before cause of how well "No Air" did for her and Chris. I have read that Jive is frugel,(sp?). Kris and Alli both went to the big events of the weekend including Clive's party so they got to mingle with the big wigs and stars still. If you listen to Kris's interview I posted in his thread you can hear him talk and I really believe he was being serious. Kris saves money when he can,(remember Kris is the one that really didn't spend his clothing allowance on AI. I think he saves money for a reason..). Also this just came to me if this was free and such then their would be a lot more of the stars from all genres's here and they would have to make it so just everyday casual people who love music would have to watch from home cause they would need the space to accomodate all the stars.

For Adam he was with ET that night so he got in free for sure.

ETA: FC I posted in here asking what had Happened between Carrie and Adam cause people in the Adam forum on idol forums were having a field day saying Adam Dissed her and that Carrie was dismissive toward him. I never said they did the deeds I was asking what happened. Teddy told me to watch the carrie interview and I did and I didn't see Carrie do anything to Adam just as Teddy said. If Carrie was being dismissive it was toward Kevin Frazier cause he was the one that was talking to her and that is when she was doing the BLAH BLAH BLAH stuff.

Shannon

I think Jordin and Chris got a Grammy nomination for No Air in the Pop Vocal Dual category - but I will need to check on that.

FC did you ever find that link to the article you were talking about? I'd love to read it. I honestly agree with every word you spoke too. And I know what you meant when you were referring to "art". Sorry if I took it out of the context you meant it in.

You were not the one that did that. Angel seemed upset about Taylor and things being said. I wanted her to know I was not referring to Taylor - just in general.

I will go looking now to see if the Chicago Trib has it on-line or just in print.

Here you go Teddy!

http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.com/turn_it_up/2010/02/taylor-swift-and-the-grammys-is-that-all-there-is.html

Firecracker wrote:

You were not the one that did that. Angel seemed upset about Taylor and things being said. I wanted her to know I was not referring to Taylor - just in general.

I will go looking now to see if the Chicago Trib has it on-line or just in print.

I wasn't upset by anybody here. I was upset by others on others boards tearing her apart. I guess my thing is they are blaming Taylor and all she did was put out a cd that she wrote the songs for and was proud of. She isn't the one that stoled something from Gaga. She was given that trophy. Some people are acting like she walked up to Gaga and took that from her. FC as you said their were others in that category and all the cd's were deserving in the eyes of the Grammy people cause they all go nominated. I just don't think it is fair when people hate on and attack a person over something like this cause it really wasn't the persons fault it was the people who voted she get the award. You guys here are putting the blame where it is and that is on the people that gave it to her.

I do have to say that I don't see what you are saying with Gaga's cd cause I don't like it. I like Pokerface and that is the only song I like of hers. So if going by that I can't say that Gaga deserved the grammy more than any of the others that were up. On the Taylor front I am not a huge fan of hers either by the way. I like 4 of her songs. I do not think she has a strong voice and I have told my family that she is not really a strong live performer. I have only seen two performances of hers that I was impressed with the vocals. What Taylor and Gaga have for themselves is they both have great writing skills that draws in the fans.


By the way who else was nominated for that besides Taylor and Gaga? My stepmom turned the channel before that.

Shannon

Beyonce, Black Eyed Peas and Dave Mathews Band. If they wanted to play it safe and still go for art Dave Mathews Band would have been an excellent choice.

No, it is not right for people to hate on Taylor - but it is right to hate on how the Grammys have changed from rewarding the most musically artisitc with the most financially successful.

The article from The Chicago Trib puts it very well.

Taylor is a sweet and lovely girl who writes very well for her targeted audience. I stand by my opinion though that she can't sing worth a lick

Thanks a bunch for the link FC!

FC, I share your opinion about Taylor Swift's singing ability--the nonexistent singing ability, I might add.