you know who almost always gets it wrong: the Grammys
unlike almost every other tv show the Grammys has a chance every year to present the all time greatest performances of the past with the best of today
and they hardly ever do it.
i dont know, but it sure seems like to me they are so concerned about today that yesterday gets shoehorned in like it’s a Have-To instead of a Get-To.
im sorry but you GET to have the Eagles with Jackson Browne on your stage. You get to have Stevie Wonder, you get to have Joe Perry. And no, you dont Have to have Pitbull or Pentatonix or Carrie Underwood.
and for the love of Miles Davis, you don’t have to have Justin Bieber or Skrillex
ever.
with Kendrick and Adele and Taylor and Lady Gaga there is already a great parade of current stars delivering today’s sounds, you dont need Demi Lovato, but fine, she’s fine. But should the Grammys be about “fine”?
If I was running the Grammys i’d have one litmus test for performances: the Holy Fuck test.
the cast of Hamilton, Kendrick, Gaga and Adele made me say Holy Fuck and there were artists in the building (Beyonce, Ice Cube, Foo Fighters, Stevie Wonder) who could have delivered but either weren’t invited to rock the mic or were paired up with lesser thans.
the goal of the Grammys shouldnt be about record sales, it should be about documenting amazing artistry in a controlled environment for a tv show. that, all by itself, will trigger sales.
if you make that the standard, it will lift all boats, including Bieber’s, if you truly belieb he has talent.
in fact i turned 21 in florence, italy.
have i told you im the luckiest man in the world? i am.
its 92 in the shade. what year is this? where are you? where am i? in the hills of beverly. texas tea. black gold. 
sure, for the right opportunity.
