#TRENDSIMO: Do the Grammys Even Mean Anything Anymore…to Anyone but Beyoncé?

As expected, this year’s just-announced Grammy nominations were a shit show. The expected nominees – Beyoncé, Kendrick Lamar, Adele, Harry Styles and Lizzo were all represented well – as was the seemingly always-in-the-running Brandi Carlile. Mary J. Blige, reappeared surprisingly in the big categories after being gone for nearly a decade-plus from the nomination springboard. And then we have ABBA who, after scoring a shock single nomination last year, got four more nods this year.

Remember that, okay? ABBA has received five nominations in the past two years. Beyoncé just earned nine more nods just this year, now matching her husband Jay-Z with 88 nominations – the record for the most nominations of all time.

Beyoncé is likely to make history regardless of whether she takes home the Album Of The Year award (which she’s never won, though somehow many in the business believe she is “owed” this) since even with just one win, she’ll break the tie she’s had with Quincy Jones for the second-most awarded Grammy recipient of all time. If she manages to win three, she’ll tie with the all-time record holder, Sir Georg Solti. Of course, any more than that and she’ll be the most honored Grammy winner of all time.

Now let that sit in your head for a minute. In the 64 years that recorded music has been celebrated at the Grammys, 41-year-old Beyoncé will likely become the most celebrated artist of the Grammys of all time.

I want to make it clear that what I’m about to say is not a diss or throwing shade at the talented artist she is even in the slightest way, but come on guys. Beyoncé is many things, but is she really deserving of being the most celebrated artist ever?

I’m tired of award shows and frankly even weekly charts continuously revamping their own criterion for what qualifies and quantifies the eventual results. The rule changes continue to undermine music history and we now see the dwindling impact of previous charts. In many ways – in an effort to stay relevant and understandably catch up with the times, contemporary sounds and even the way music is tracked – programs like the Grammys have made themselves now seem unnecessary.

A few weeks back, Billboard Magazine congratulated Taylor Swift for becoming the first artist ever to occupy all 10 positions of the Billboard Hot 100. Of course, Drake just pulled off eight out of 10 this past week. While these are impressive accomplishments, is it really a fair assessment that they are the only artists capable of accomplishing this if we actually went back in history. The Beatles, Michael Jackson, Madonna, Eminem – many artists would have likely garnered the same ability, but they sadly weren’t around when streaming counted and the public had free access to music beyond just radio or buying the track. There needed to be a physical release of the single and the song needed to be pushed on radio. There were such different rules, it’s almost as if we are celebrating an accomplishment that only became possible a few years ago – so why are we even trying to compare it to an era before that?

I ask this about the Grammys too because there are so many categories now, and there are many artists who benefit exponentially from the style of music they produce, making them far more capable of winning more Grammys than someone else. Let’s take Taylor Swift. The singer has now won Album Of The Year three times – a record for a female artist. While her music was still listed in the ‘country’ genre, she won five additional Grammys. Since then, she’s won three more, making for a grand total of 11.

Since Swift went pop, or the Grammys decided to categorize her there, she has basically lost nearly three to four categories as chances to a win or at least land a nomination every year because of that. Frankly, her three wins for Album Of The Year seem to have been in large part due to the fact that she didn’t have more than a handful of categories she could even get nominated in.

There has been this perpetual belief that rap and hip-hop have been underserved over the years by the Grammys in the major categories – Album Of The Year, Song Of The Year and Record Of The Year. While some have argued that this has been a form of racism, you do have to ask the question – if an unequal number of tracks in rap and hip-hop get the opportunity to get even nominated for any Grammy category, isn’t that unfair too?

Regardless of logic, many high-profile artists have just given up. The Weeknd was altogether snubbed in the year of “Blinding Lights” and hasn’t looked at the awards since. Drake followed suit and no longer wishes to compete. In perhaps the coolest move ever, Silk Sonic (aka Bruno Mars and Anderson .Paak) recused themselves from consideration this year for any category altogether.

The superduo were rewarded heavily last year for “Leave The Door Open” as the single was the only track eligible, and lo and behold, it won both Record and Song Of The Year. So as to not suffer backlash or, in my opinion, be not likely win again, they decided not to have their album even be considered.

Which then begs the question, if you remove some of the biggest artists who should have been nominated, and then have some artists no longer even submitting their material, and then have other artists who just don’t have categories that they can compete in, do the Grammys really even matter or mean anything anymore?

It seems we’re gearing up for yet another Adele vs. Beyoncé showdown even though Bad Bunny should actually win Album Of The Year. Of course, this has also been the year of the white man returning to front and center, so it could be Harry Styles’ to lose.

Honestly, I wouldn’t care either way. Adele and Beyoncé have 15 and 28 Grammys respectively. Neither of them have the grace to say, ‘Let me step down,’ and not submit themselves in every imaginable category (though kudos to Adele for not releasing “Easy On Me” last year before the release of her album “30” to benefit from the possibility of a two-year double dip of wins).

At a time when even less people are watching the Grammys than ever before, besides Beyoncé, I can’t honestly even think who cares. And for those first-time nominees, I do wonder if a Grammy nomination and eventual win will really mean the same thing that it once did. Remember there are now bigger superstars across all genres who’ve never won a Grammy than those who have! Purists will always place an asterix next to Beyoncé’s name at the Grammys, just like they will do next to that of Taylor Swift with Billboard.

While there is nothing less powerful about either woman’s contribution to music, it’s unfortunate that a night that used to celebrate the diversity of music and would introduce the world to new sounds, songs and singers, is just trying to look hip now, look woke and most disappointingly, look like they aren’t just pandering to stay relevant.

Grammys, I think your time is up and you have no one to thank for this sinking shit show than yourselves… and maybe Beyoncé.