[JPL] Hancock win latest in right artist, wrong year category

Jazz Promo Services jazzpromo at earthlink.net
Wed Feb 20 11:53:05 EST 2008


http://www.kansascity.com/414/story/496779.html

Wednesday, Feb 20, 2008
Posted on Tue, Feb. 19, 2008
Hancock win latest in right artist, wrong year category
By GREG KOT
Chicago Tribune
With his Grammy Award for album of the year Sunday, Herbie Hancock joins a
long list of venerated musicians who have won music's biggest prize decades
after releasing their best work.

Hancock's "River: The Joni Letters" joins Ray Charles' "Genius Loves
Company" (which won in 2005), Steely Dan's "Two Against Nature" (2001) and
Tony Bennett's "MTV Unplugged" (1995) in a dubious category: Right Artist,
Wrong Year.

These awards honored career achievement more than they did artistic
excellence or impact on the year in music. "River" is certainly a competent
piece of work, but it's far from Hancock's best. There were at least a dozen
hard-core jazz albums released last year that received far greater accolades
from music buffs. From his classic solo album "Maiden Voyage" (1965) to his
innovative meld of jazz, electro-funk and hip-hop on "Rockit" (1983),
Hancock has done better work in the past. He's won Grammys for some of his
achievements, but never for album of the year; indeed, "River" was the first
album by a jazz artist to win the top honor in five decades.

But "River" had several things in its favor. It was just enough (but not too
much) jazz, so it shaded its pop overtures in a veneer of sophistication and
class (the same reason that people like Sting and Norah Jones keep winning
Grammys). It paired two artistic heavyweights in Hancock and Joni Mitchell,
whose songs provided a template for the pianist's arrangements. And it was
up against a couple of favorites who really didn't do much to ingratiate
themselves to the staid National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences, the
18,000-member organization that annually votes on the Grammys.

The academy hates controversies, except when they can bring higher ratings
to its nationally televised awards ceremony. And album-of-the-year
front-runners Amy Winehouse and Kanye West did their part with dramatic
performances on the telecast and juicy, tabloid-baiting back stories in the
months leading up to it. There was Winehouse, the outlaw soul singer with a
drug problem and an attitude. She got sprung from rehab just in time to
perform on the Grammys, though she had to do it via satellite in London
because of visa problems (imagine that). And then there was West, who has
blasted the Grammys in past years for denying him album of the year, only to
turn into a relatively sympathetic figure in recent months because of the
tragic death of his mother and closest adviser, Donda West.

Love them or hate them, West and Winehouse brought a lot of sizzle to a show
that normally drags, with academy big shots giving speeches and hopelessly
mismatched performers gamely performing duets (Kid Rock and Keely Smith,
anyone?). Winehouse was much improved over the fidgety, out-of-it performer
who toured America last year before her health bottomed out. West dazzled
with an over-the-top robot-rap set complemented by the helmeted French duo
Daft Punk, then a stirring tribute to his mother.

But West's reputation as a petulant egotist - deserved or not - hasn't made
him any friends at the academy and turned off many potential fans to the
accomplishment of his music. Winehouse, too, has been elevated to celebrity
status not by her music but by her wayward behavior off the stage and
outside the recording studio.

So in giving its top honor to Hancock, the academy once again made the safe
choice. It gave it to the nice guy steeped in respectable music, as a
victory lap for a career well done. Award presenter Quincy Jones was
stunned. Hancock's jaw dropped. Nobody, least of all the winner, saw this
one coming.

The award had immediate impact. "River" shot to No. 2 on the amazon.com
popularity list the next morning (behind Winehouse). But is it really the
album by which we will remember the year in music? Was it truly the
embodiment of "artistic excellence" in 2007? That's not even remotely true.

If the Grammys were looking for a revered artist to honor for a late-career
triumph, they would've been better off choosing Mavis Staples' "We'll Never
Turn Back." Unfortunately, Staples' album wasn't even nominated - a huge
oversight. It isn't the first time the Grammys got it wrong.

Greg Kot: greg at gregkot.com


More information about the jazzproglist mailing list