Hi!!!
Aloha. I'm feeling so inspired to write this post, which will hopefully make it a good one. This is a few parts music, a few parts social commentary and I am so passionate about this particular topic. I hope that you find this an interesting read.
I was reading NME online on my break the other day and I stumbled across the list of nominees for this year's NME Awards which are sponsored by VO5. I was scrolling through the lists for Best Band, Best Female Solo Artist and so on and then I hit upon the following,
I was shocked. A Worst Band Category - are you kidding? And it got me thinking.
Most of the nominees in this category are hugely successful and widely loved - I think Clean Bandit's 6 Top Ten hits and The (Grammy Nominated) Chainsmokers 5 Top Forty hits are evidence of this. It seems so odd to try and downplay these significant achievements in this way.
Aside from the numbers is the point I feel I am always going back to - music is subjective. What you love, I may not and my favourite song might not be yours. It doesn't mean that what I like is the worst or that you are wrong, it means that we have different likes and dislikes.
Aside from the numbers is the point I feel I am always going back to - music is subjective. What you love, I may not and my favourite song might not be yours. It doesn't mean that what I like is the worst or that you are wrong, it means that we have different likes and dislikes.
Some of these groups, like Five Seconds of Summer, have a predominantly teenage fan base. It can be difficult when you're thirteen or fourteen to feel like your opinions are appreciated or respected, and by shoving the groups that teens love into this category, it may make them feel as though they aren't cool enough, or don't have mature enough opinions, or don't know enough - the last things most teenagers want to feel.
In my eyes, this whole thing seems like an attempt to be more controversial, more edgy and therefore, somehow, more cool. Maybe, in writing this, I'm buying into a notion that this might stir up conversation or maintain relevance. But I don't want to stand by quietly, watching hard working musicians and performers with a passion for what they do having their reputations damaged by somebody's idea of 'banter'.
Having done a bit of research for this post, I've discovered this is nothing new at the NME awards, and if anything, only having one 'worst' category might be progress for them. That's a shame. I don't closely follow award shows and so I hadn't realised how normal this was.
I don't have a problem with awarding the acts that the majority of people on a panel or participating in a poll like most - these people have made their decisions about their preferences in a subjective field, and rewarding success is good. But I don't think it's necessary to add into that an option to 'award' people that they dislike because it doesn't make sense. What purpose doesn't it serve? For a winning act of a positive category - Best Solo Male, for example - new opportunities and positive press arise.
So, following this idea, doesn't that mean that the 'winning' act of a negative category will lose out on opportunities and get caught up in negative press? Who does that help? I don't think it does the real winners any more favours than winning already gives them. It just seems pointless and unkind.
Having done a bit of research for this post, I've discovered this is nothing new at the NME awards, and if anything, only having one 'worst' category might be progress for them. That's a shame. I don't closely follow award shows and so I hadn't realised how normal this was.
I don't have a problem with awarding the acts that the majority of people on a panel or participating in a poll like most - these people have made their decisions about their preferences in a subjective field, and rewarding success is good. But I don't think it's necessary to add into that an option to 'award' people that they dislike because it doesn't make sense. What purpose doesn't it serve? For a winning act of a positive category - Best Solo Male, for example - new opportunities and positive press arise.
So, following this idea, doesn't that mean that the 'winning' act of a negative category will lose out on opportunities and get caught up in negative press? Who does that help? I don't think it does the real winners any more favours than winning already gives them. It just seems pointless and unkind.
When it comes to subjective things, like music, I think it is definitely more than alright to celebrate what you and others like, and award shows are a means of doing that. But I personally think it's unnecessary to publicly make a scene of what people dislike in the same way.
We do not need to add any more condescension and frankly hate into this world. It is ridiculous. Tearing other people down does not make you seem cooler. I think it makes you seem idiotic. I don't want to be told by somebody else what I should or shouldn't like, be that in relation to people, music or beliefs. And I won't stand by and watch others spread negativity about certain people or things to this effect.
Ultimately, I think it comes down to this. You have a right to an opinion. Of course you do, you're human. But that does not mean that you have the right to be nasty.
I hope your day is amazing!
GingerSnaps xxx
Thanks so much for reading.
What do you think of all this? I'd love to hear your thoughts, so do leave a comment.
Hope you enjoyed the post.
I hope your day is amazing!
GingerSnaps xxx