Why award shows will always be unjust
Well, if you think about it, every year someone gets shafted out of a award. The person who was deserving one year will get the award about twenty years down the line. I think the classic examples of this are both in the grammys though i am sure more slights and perpetuations of this law exsist: Exhibit A: Jethro Tull winning the innagural heavy metal grammy. In the late 80's the grammys created this catagory in an attempt to appear"with it" Of corse, they follow The Shaft And Then The apologetical Award conundrum to a T. Jethro Tull didn't win a grammy for Aqualung, which is and was disgraceful. Instead of a lifetime achievement grammy, the band beats out Mettalica and AC/DC. AC/DC Has yet to get an award. Anyway, that decision was utterr horseshit. Now Exhibit B: The Who Being Shunted. Onme of the most influential bands of all time is going to get an award, what's wrong with this you say? Well the "honor" wasn't even telivised!!! Insteaad, they show it two days before the awards night! How shitty! Anybody agree or disagree? I think this theory will play out pretty well. Also, popular things beat deserving ones. Case in point: Titanic wins 14 oscars and American History X wins none, Matrix FX beat out star wars, etc. Bullet time my ass!
|
