Let me confess that I did not watch the Grammy Awards last night.
No, it wasn’t a political thing. Eastern Orthodox Christians are days away from Great Lent and, after last night, we will strive not to eat meat until Pascha (Easter) on April 8. Thus, some fun-loving Ortho guys met at an Irish pub last night to consume the fatted calf, so to speak. The pub didn’t even have the Grammys on the TV monitors.
So I missed the show. However, one did not need a degree in political science to see the Dixie Chicks train comin’ down the tracks. If you want to see what I’m talking about, check out the Liberal Country Fan blog (source of the graphic with this post) and note the changes in the recent tour by the Chicks. Those gals did some wonderful preaching to their new choir and, clearly, it paid off.
Once again, let me stress that there is no way that one can equate support for the president and his Iraq policies with cultural and religious issues. However, one would have to be blind not to see that there is a red-state, blue-state vibe going on in the music industry culture wars (please buy this book). I mean, ask the Dixie Chicks about that. And some leaders in the country music establishment think that their artists are not getting a fair shake, period, at the Grammys in other ways.
So the Chicks were a hit in the cultural zip codes that matter the most — blue ones.
Thus, the Los Angeles Times went with a nice little faith-based turn of phrase in its Grammy lede:
The Dixie Chicks are Nashville refugees for reasons of politics and personality — after stinging comments about President Bush, country radio banned them and country fans shunned them — but on Sunday the trio found blue-state redemption at the 49th annual Grammy Awards with five awards, including song, record and album of the year.
“Blue-state redemption” — that says it all.
Meanwhile, reporter J. Freedom du Lac of The Washington Post included the oddest collection of religion notes from the night’s rites — starting with a “who needs enemies” laugh-out-loud line from the so-called gospel-music part of the program:
Most embarrassed winner? Third Day guitarist Mark Lee. When his group was named winner of the pop/contemporary gospel album award, Lee was busy flushing away his big moment. “Dude, we’re winning the Grammy!” frontman Mac Powell said from the stage. “You can’t hold it?” Lee materialized moments later, blushing. (Later, backstage Lee explained he “wasn’t literally in the bathroom” but just running late.)
The thank-you speeches included countless references to God and famed record exec Clive Davis (not necessarily in that order), plus two to L. Ron Hubbard. Chick Corea’s wife acknowledged the Church of Scientology founder in accepting the best instrumental arrangement award on behalf of her musician husband, who was dealing with traffic. (So L.A.!) Corea showed up in time to accept the best instrumental jazz album award for “The Ultimate Adventure,” based on a Hubbard book of the same name, and name-checked the author along with a long list of musical greats.
Meanwhile, R&B diva Mary J. Blige went far beyond vague God talk as the stage hands prepared to help her off the stage, offering this emotional sendoff:
“Father, God, lord and savior Jesus Christ, I thank you so much,” Blige led off just for starters. “Thank God for this album and this award … . It’s shown that I’m growing into a better human bein’.
By the way, I believe that Associated Press style would use an uppercase “L” in “Lord” and an upper-case “S” in “Savior.” Has there been a non-Trinitarian change in the journalism Bible that I missed, somehow?
And, speaking of country music and the principalities and powers of the entertainment universe, I have to mention that bizarre and wonderful quote from triple-Grammy winner Carrie “American Idol” Underwood:
“I love country music first of all,” said the 23-year-old native of Muskogee, Okla. “There are so many people to thank. I’m going to start at the top: Thank you God, thank you mom and dad, thank you Simon Fuller, who created the show ‘American Idol’ that got me here. I owe everything to Simon Fuller … .”
And all of the realists said, “Amen.”
 | Posted at 10:10 am |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (18) |
February 12, 2007, at 10:39 am
“And some leaders in the country music establishment think that their artists are not getting a fair shake…”
Oh, the rich irony in that statement, considering the amount of blackballing and rigid notions of what is acceptable within the country “mainstream” from the Nashville power-brokers. One look at the careers of mavericks like Johnny Cash, or underground darlings like Neko Case will tell you that their grumblings are all about cash, and preserving a certain image, and not about defending the honor of country music.
I did watch the entire show (I’m a sucker for award ceremonies), and it was obvious that the coronation of the Dixie Chicks was a “message” to those who participated in their blackballing a few years back. But then, in today’s climate that “message” is utterly safe and tame (now that 70% of America doesn’t like Bush or the Iraq war very much). The Grammies have always been about quantifying what was “mainstream” and acceptable. Sure the show is going to trend “left” (just as the CMA awards are going to trend “right”), but its Los Angeles, of course the message is going to be a tad left of center.
This was a very “safe” show. Beyond the Dixie Chick love-fest there were no political statements of any substance, no shocking displays of body-parts or foul language, and the bulk of the awards were given off-camera to make more room of for performances. This was, it seems, a test-run for the big show next year (50th anniversary don’t you know).
Gnarls Barkley were great in their pilot uniforms.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 10:50 am
The article about Bilge also seeks to give the reader the flavor of her accent: “bein” for “being.” Funny how you don’t see news articles that quote people saying “New Jooisy” and the like.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 11:12 am
This post is a bit OT, but I need to say thanks.
Terry, thank you for pointing me to the ABSOLUTLEY perfect birthday gift for my mother, who is a definitely a blue-necked, country music listenin’, city councilwoman in Oregon.
God works in mysterious ways.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 11:21 am
TOM:
OT? Is that online-ese for “Out there”?
I assume you mean the Willman book. I’ll pass your note along to him.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 11:32 am
“And some leaders in the country music establishment think that their artists are not getting a fair shake…”
Oh, the rich irony in that statement, considering the amount of blackballing and rigid notions of what is acceptable within the country “mainstream” from the Nashville power-brokers. One look at the careers of mavericks like Johnny Cash, or underground darlings like Neko Case will tell you that their grumblings are all about cash, and preserving a certain image, and not about defending the honor of country music.
I did watch the entire show (I’m a sucker for award ceremonies), and it was obvious that the coronation of the Dixie Chicks was a “message” to those who participated in their blackballing a few years back. But then, in today’s climate that “message” is utterly safe and tame (now that 70% of America doesn’t like Bush or the Iraq war very much). The Grammies have always been about quantifying what was “mainstream” and acceptable. Sure the show is going to trend “left” (just as the CMA awards are going to trend “right”), but its Los Angeles, of course the message is going to be a tad left of center.
This was a very “safe” show. Beyond the Dixie Chick love-fest there were no political statements of any substance, no shocking displays of body-parts or foul language, and the bulk of the awards were given off-camera to make more room of for performances. This was, it seems, a test-run for the big show next year (50th anniversary don’t you know).
Gnarls Barkley were simply great in their pilot uniforms.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 1:52 pm
Sorry Terry - didn’t mean to confuse…
OT: off-topic
I wondered if that would be clear - it might pertain more to forums than blogs. My french is much better than my internet.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 2:43 pm
Terry, thanks for the hilarious post. I haven’t subjected myself to the Grammies since “We Are the World” beat out “Money for Nothing” in 1985.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 3:04 pm
Speaking of OT (or perhaps merely tangential):
Sort of an ad hoc guys-only, Meatfare Sunday night Byzantine Orthodox rendition of Fat Tuesday, eh? Well, rock on dudes, but don’t tell the folks at ROCOR.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 3:27 pm
Let’s face it. The music business today is BIG COnGLOMERATES, and big conglomerates aren’t much different then other Big Money interests in pushing “multiculturalism” and “diversity”.
I’m wondering why country and western music is now grouped under some broad category called “Americana”, other then the cultural bias of the media conglomerates, and their hatred of the values of much of their marketplace.
So let’s mix together Bob Dylan with Merle Haggard, and hope that Merle Haggard’s constituency get’s lost in the shuffle.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 4:13 pm
By the way, I believe that Associated Press style would use an uppercase “L†in “Lord†and an upper-case “S†in “Savior.†Has there been a non-Trinitarian change in the journalism Bible that I missed, somehow? Think they’d write “prophet Muhammad”?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 6:27 pm
“So the Chicks were a hit in the cultural zip codes that matter the most — blue ones.”
Well, mabey “matter most to other blue state people.”
I didn’t watch the Grammys last night because I care so little about them I didn’t even know they were on. Besides I got Sid Meyer’s CIVILIZATION COMPLETE for my birthday, and was happily using my new copy of Civ III (with Conquests so I can now play the Byzantines!). My Greater Sumerian Republic has crushed and annexed both the Maya and the Inca territories, and driven the Aztecs down to a handful of cities in the rocky peninsula that is the southernmost part of our continent. Across the seas the Americans and the Arabs are having on again off again wars of expansion, mostly at the American’s expense, so I am using my superior technology to play ballance of power there. At first I was backing the Arabs, but ever since the Arabs took Dallas, Clevaland, and Orlando I’ve been sending support to the USA. If I can find some more uraniaum I may sell it to the Americans, along with rocketry, so they can build ICBMs. That would put a second nuclear power on the board, but I have a large enough arsenal and a good enough relationship with Lincoln that I am not worried about the USA attacking me. I’m sort of proud of this as it is my first game on Level 3 that hasn’t ended in a horrible wipeout before I even got Iron Working.
My point here is that people from blue zipcodes, chattering about other people (mostly from blue zipcodes) who give awards to other people (again mostly from blue zipcodes) matters no more out here in Red Zip codes (or the real world for that matter) than the exploits of my fictional Sumerian Republic matter outside of my laptop P.C.
Goody Goody for the Dixie Chicks… but please keep in mind that the culture of the blue states is of no more interest to me (or tens of millions of other red state folk) than the future of my fictional Civilization is to you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 7:14 pm
By my reckoning the Dixie Chicks are popular with most country music fans, not just the Blue State ones. And let’s not forget their terrible crime: They said, “We’re ashamed President Bush is from the State of Texas” in front of an English audience. I’m old enough to remember when it was the birth right of all Americans to criticize their politicians.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 8:03 pm
Jinzang:
And it still is. That’s the beauty of it. It is also the right of Americans to wave angry posters at left-wing banjo players and decline to buy their CDs. What a world!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 12, 2007, at 11:17 pm
Larry, welcome back!
In case you missed it, in honor of the tmatt trio, I have developed my own trio of possible explanations for why the press reports on religion as it does:
1. The press just doesn’t get religion
2. Some in the press get their particular brand of religion but just don’t get people with other religious viewpoints
3. For those in the press who get religion, politics trumps religion
The longer that I follow this blog, the more I believe that, for many in the press, politics trumps everything. If there is a political angle to a story, the press will exploit it and focus on it. If there isn’t, the press will invent one or underreport the story. Politics = power, and the press craves power, even as it loses readership at an accelerated pace.
I honestly feel sorry for people who are consumed by politics. People who devote so much energy to demonizing the “enemy” and defending those who share their own views, even when those folks are pretty unsavory characters. While Terry pokes fun at what people said at an inane awards show, others in the press take it sooo seriously. They analyze the politically charged comments and explain their extreme importance to morons like me.
For the Bolinger family, the important event on Sunday was not the Grammies but my daughter’s basketball tournament. She and her teammates learned what it was like to play their best and still lose a heartbreaker because they were hacked to death (broken nose and bruises galore) and the officials swallowed their whistles. Tough lesson about how life can be. But there’s no political angle to this story, and it took place in Flyover Country, so I guess that it’s meaningless.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 13, 2007, at 8:02 am
I watched the Grammies mainly for The Police, who I thought were great, and became steadily less interested in the show from that point on.
That being said, I found the Chicks self-congratulatory attitude towards their supposed martyrdom to be rather ridiculous on two grounds.
1. To act as though one is courageous and revolutionary for making the statement that war is BAD and its bad when people die because of war is a bit self-deluded. We all pretty much know that already. And if you don’t explain why this war is so bad that we should immediately withdraw all troops and leave Iraq in a state of complete chaos, you’re not really saying anything new. Why not go out on the same limb again and preach to us about how smoking is bad for your health? Furthermore, criticizing the president when oversees is nothing more than shallow, cheap pandering to an audience. It requires about the same amount of bravery as Jeff Foxworthy asking a crowded auditorium if there are any rednecks in the house tonight—and probably gets the same reaction.
2. As tmatt rightly pointed out, people have the right to stop listening to your music and buying concert tickets if they don’t like what you have to say. One has a constitutional right to free speech. One does not have a constitutional right to make people continue giving their money to you when your free speech ticks them off.
Personally, I haven’t been able to listen to the Dixie Chicks since early ‘00. That’s when I broke up with a girl who listened to them constantly. So whenever I hear Natalie Maines’ voice…shudder.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 13, 2007, at 10:10 am
It’s one thing for individuals to boycott the Dixie Chicks. It’s another for stations owned by Clear Channel, the nation’s largest radio conglomerate, to organize a boycott. As a radio conglomerate, Clear Channel is beholden to the government for regulatory reasons. There’s a name for industry led boycotts. It’s called blacklisting and it stinks today just as much as it did in the days of Senator McCarthy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 13, 2007, at 6:13 pm
“As a radio conglomerate, Clear Channel is beholden to the government for regulatory reasons. ”
It is?
Sure they use the public airwaves, but they pay for that liscence. As long as they don’t use them in an indecnet fashon they still have Constitutional rights.
This is a unique interpretation of the U.S. Constitution… exactly at what point does a person (be they an individual or a legal person such as a corporation) become so rich that they loose first amendment protection, the right of free assocition, and the right to contract and just become some sort of “common carrier” obliged to the government through vauge “regulatory” means? Richer than Striesand and Teresa Hienz I’d wager, but less rich than Clearchannel and Wallmart I’d guess.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 15, 2007, at 12:35 pm
“There’s a name for industry led boycotts. It’s called blacklisting and it stinks today just as much as it did in the days of Senator McCarthy.”
I think you need to slow down a bit and parse this one.
The blacklist was put in place by Hollywood in response to the hearings of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, more commonly known as HUAC. (Joe McCarthy was an irresponsible blowhard but, as a senator and not a member of HUAC nor the head of any Hollywood studio, he was not, even in an indirect way, responsible for the blacklist.)
And the crucial thing about the blacklist was that it was secret. People who were on it had no way of fighting back. Most people had no way of knowing they were even on it. And the studios acted in collusion to impose the backlist.
What Clear Channel and others have done here is very different. They have acted in a public manner that makes criticism and response possible. Their choice is really no different than what Seven Eleven did a few decades ago when they took porn off their shelves. If customers didn’t like it, they could go elsewhere.
You may not like what Clear Channel has done but they have every right to do it both morally and constitutionally.
Michel
Like or Dislike:
0 
0