Little Christian Birdies...or the Dove/GMA awards...

[ajyouthguy]

not that it's super exciting, but i know there are at least a few of you who would be interested in this if you haven't seen it yet, the Dove Award noms for this year...

https://app.e2ma.net/app/view:CampaignPublic/id:23079.1748476703/rid:dad880b0a86256221ebd2ebfecf2c0b9

[bloop]

Well, my reaction was "Who?" as much as "Why?" on this list.  I guess that's a good thing.

[Ian]

this thread makes me sad

[ajyouthguy]

Well, my reaction was "Who?" as much as "Why?" on this list.  I guess that's a good thing.

i'd say about half of it is ultra-predictable, and the other half is 'who?/what?/who cares' type stuff.

one weird thing, though, i noticed that the major categories had 7 noms in each, instead of 5 like in the past.  weird.

[murlough23]

Chris Tomlin is pretty much the standard-bearer for CCM's "middle of the road" right now, so it's not surprising that he's the top nod-getter. I think he's good at what he does, but predictable to a fault, so I mostly enjoy him for a few enduring songs that I hear on Sunday mornings. I don't own or want to own any of his albums, and I don't think he belongs among the cream of the crop, but his music sells, so that's what gets awards.

[latinchic]

I think all Christian Indie Artists should unite and make the Indie Awards Show.

Can you imagine seeing OtR, Sufjan, etc. perform there??!

I vote for Paste to lead this effort.=)

[spacebrat311]

I think having indie Christian music awards poses much the same problem that Christian music awards pose. They presuppose the idea that there could possibly be something called Christian music or Christian art separate from other music or art, which just seems to me to be a silly idea. If art means anything, or carries any truth, it can only do so in truth because of its orientation, by design or accident, around the truth of YHWH. I'm not saying that no art is Christian art so much as I'm saying that ALL art is Christian art, to the extent that it is art at all. Even things that are valuable to us because they show us the brokenness or fallenness of an artist in unknowing need of grace is an exercise in the truth of grace and redemption.

This is why things like a Christian music scene and Christian music awards bug me. Not because I think that the representation of truth and faith in art is a bad idea; on the contrary because I think that by claiming that these things are Christian, we are "giving ground" in a sense to the idea of secular art, ground that does not make sense to give and is not ours to give at all.

</rant>

[murlough23]

There's also the problem of "indie" being a loosely connected grouping of relatively small-time artists with more grassroots followings. One band's camp has likely not even heard of the other band in many cases, so who gets awards will unfortunately just come back down to a popularity contest, giving the recognition to the most recognizable names of the bunch. It would cause the same problem that you were trying to solve (even if more deserving artists generally received the awards).

I fully understand and share the desire to give recognition to the unsung heroes of the industry. But in practice, it's rather difficult to have an official, widely recognized awards ceremony for a disparate and disjointed community of artists, who by their nature don't all define themselves as belonging to the same scene or category. And these artists probably have more appreciation for accolades that are given in more of a grassroots or word-of-mouth manner - fans recommending stuff to other fans of similar genres, good reviews, etc.

[bloop]

I would just rather the awards that exist just start giving careful consideration to good art.

[murlough23]

I would just rather the awards that exist just start giving careful consideration to good art.

The problem is that art isn't even part of their premise in the first place, and thus, expecting things to change for the better is a fruitless waste of time. The best we can ever hope for is for something relevant and artfully made to just magically happen to win an award because it also happens to be popular (read: pretty much every time Jars of Clay gets nominated).

The Dove Awards, and the majority of the Christian music industry, honor popularity. They may say it's not about that, but the reality is that quantity = quality in their worldview, because that reaches the most people and therefore gets the most "ministry" done. The Dove Awards won't change unless the industry gatekeepers won't change, and those gatekeepers won't change until they see consumer interests changing. And consumer interests won't change until the pervasive "bless me by making me feel clean and comfortable" nature of the American Church changes. And who's gonna change that? Hopefully people like us, who at least realize something has gone horribly wrong with the Church's status quo, and whose buying habits and choices of which churches to attend reflect that and (hopefully) influence other Christians.

Yeah, it's an insurmountable task, but it's better than waiting around for the institution to change and bitching about how stuck-in-the-mud they are when they don't.

[bloop]

I'm not about to get so ambitious as to think I can grant others taste (also, I'm sure that would get irksome to those people), but those ostensibly at the top of the critical food chain should try their best to reward that which is good.

[murlough23]

I'm not about to get so ambitious as to think I can grant others taste (also, I'm sure that would get irksome to those people)

It's an ongoing, collaborative process. It's not, "I like the good stuff and you like the bad stuff, so here, get with the program and start liking what I like." You have good taste, and I hope I have good taste, and we don't like all of the same things. But we've influenced each other's tastes in good ways. (For example, I might not have become a huge Sufjan Stevens fan if you hadn't recommended him years ago. I'm sure I must have piqued your interest in a few artists over the years whom you might otherwise have not gotten into.) I know what being a part of this phorum has done for my tastes - I see the evidence when I go through my old mix CDs and look at the evolution of my personal preferences from before about 2001 up to now.

I'm not going to be able to get a person to stop listening to Kutless, for example. That's just going to piss them off if I try (not that this is going to stop me from reacting honestly to bad music). But I can suggest that they listen to an album by Sleeping at Last or Thrice or Jars of Clay or whoever. I can hope that they get interested in some of the more artistic stuff, and that one day, they look back at their old Kutless records and realize they're not getting as much out of 'em.

but those ostensibly at the top of the critical food chain should try their best to reward that which is good.

They have to be aware that it even exists first. That's where the grassroots, word-of-mouth stuff comes in. One fan exposes others to it, a few of them becomes fans, some music fan in the chain somewhere also happens to be a critic (either an armchair critic like me or a pro). Or they happen to be a radio deejay, or a youth pastor, or a record label exec.

I know I can't change the world, but I figure I can do my little miniscule part. You can't really tell when one little recommendation or positive review might have a "butterfly effect" on many more other people than you could ever expect or know.

NP: "Not a Robot, But a Ghost", Andrew Bird

[bloop]

Well, then, I already do my part and I don't even have to think much about doing it.  It's not working.  The top, those in charge, need to usher in the new guard.

[murlough23]

Well, then, I already do my part and I don't even have to think much about doing it.  It's not working.

Define "working". Does it change who gets these awards? Generally not, aside from the occasional fluke. Does it change the number of people who still consider them relevant? I remember a time when the Dove Awards were much more readily available to view on TV when they are now. Clearly the market for the Doves telecast has diminished. I think it's safe to say that fewer and fewer people care with each passing year. Sure, it's still the gold standard for the industry, but more and more Christian artists are swimming away from that sinking ship every year.

The top, those in charge, need to usher in the new guard.

Why? The music is a business to them. They will do whatever makes the most business sense. That will only change as more consumers begin to vote differently with their dollars.

NP: "Love Dog", TV on the Radio

[bloop]

Define "working".

Simply put, the people still like shitty, middling music, so the bottom up approach doesn't seem to be working.  Perhaps the top can influence those who need someone to tell them what to like.

I think I see the GMAs like most awards banquets.  To get any kind of real credibility with me, they kind of need to ignore the almighty dollar and look solely at artistic merit.  Until they do that, I don't really give a shit who they like.

Just for a concrete example, the Academy gets a lot of crap for not nominating some big budget Hollywood spectacle fairly often.  While I personally think "The Dark Knight" deserved a nomination, it's the exception.  Given the fact that they do this so often, Nielsen ratings be damned, well, generally, I have to respect that.  I wish the Grammys, Doves, and others were similarly semi-obscure.

[latinchic]

Hm.  I don't know.  I know plenty of Christian musicians and singers that like indie music, are fans, and faithfully go to their shows.  I bet somebody with the right connections could get something started.

Anyway, just a random thought.

[murlough23]

Simply put, the people still like shitty, middling music, so the bottom up approach doesn't seem to be working.  Perhaps the top can influence those who need someone to tell them what to like.

A lot of the people, sure. Perhaps the majority. This is a larger problem than just the Christian music industry. Look at the Grammys. Same thing.

But I don't know if it's the same percentage of "the people" that it was, say, ten years ago. Surely the advent of the Internet has allowed the little guy to make some headway here. It'd be ridiculous to say it's been all for naught.

I think I see the GMAs like most awards banquets.  To get any kind of real credibility with me, they kind of need to ignore the almighty dollar and look solely at artistic merit.  Until they do that, I don't really give a shit who they like.

Well, that's my point. They still exist, they still stick to the same old annoying habits, but they're losing their credibility with more and more people as time goes by. You probably never cared about the Doves in the first place. I used to care; I no longer do. (Beyond caring enough to be annoyed at their predictability year in and year out, I suppose.) It'll probably take a while, but I figure eventually the system will become so irrelevant that it ceases to function. It won't translate to bigger sales, so it won't make business sense for the gatekeepers to bother with the whole production any more. These people speak the language of money, not art, so it has to get to the point where it costs more than it profits them to uphold the tradition - which will probably take a while, but I certainly think the writing's already on the wall.

Just for a concrete example, the Academy gets a lot of crap for not nominating some big budget Hollywood spectacle fairly often.  While I personally think "The Dark Knight" deserved a nomination, it's the exception.  Given the fact that they do this so often, Nielsen ratings be damned, well, generally, I have to respect that.

The Academy is apparently made up of people who make movies and who love movies, and who will go to the trouble to seek out lesser-known movies rather than just honor the winners of the popularity contest. That's great, but it's also a hit-and-miss system. They can pluck some little indie film that could out of obscurity, but only if they themselves can find it. If the film is good art, but doesn't garner enough word-of-mouth to even make national distribution, it's still not gonna get an Oscar because the Academy might not even be aware exists. (Though even then, it'll probably at least play in New York and L.A. So I guess this is a pretty rare case.)

I wish the Grammys, Doves, and others were similarly semi-obscure.

I do too. But there seems to be a different breed of gatekeeper behind those systems - these people likely view music as more of a business than an art form (a problem which is multiplied when you bring the concept of "ministry" into it, and the general consensus - which of course I disagree with - is that there's little wiggle room for artistic license, if any at all, when there's a direct message to be communicated and souls to be saved). The system won't change unless the worldview of the people behind it changes (or if those people slowly die out or retire and their positions are taken over by other people with more reformed attitudes about it). This sort of change will surely take place at a glacial pace, but I don't think it's impossible.

Of course, I don't think the industry at large - music or film or any other kind of media - is ever going to truly honor art as king in all of the best possible ways. (Even if you trust and respect the Academy Awards, this obviously doesn't determine which films will be the huge blockbuster hits.) I think humanity in general tends to be a bit too superficial and short-sighted for that to ever the be the case. But I think it's slowly getting better. More of us are opting out of the system of what's money-driven and what we have the easiest access to, and trying to look for buried treasure off the beaten path. The masses will still take the wide road. I can only ever hope to lead a tiny fraction of 'em on a side trip, but doing so is immensely satisfying.

[murlough23]

Hm.  I don't know.  I know plenty of Christian musicians and singers that like indie music, are fans, and faithfully go to their shows.

The most telling sign to me is that a few of the big names in Christian music have gone indie in some fashion. It's more of a business choice than an aesthetic one - it's not like the music changed all that radically. The artist either got fed up with a lack of freedom to sound like whatever they wanted to sound like, or the business relationship gave them diminishing returns and one side or the other initiated the end of a record label contract, then the artist decided they didn't really need to shop around for another record deal. The Internet has really been the precipitating factor here - it's been much easier to spread word of mouth and to distribute the actual music than it used to be in the analogue age. A number of artists have simply chosen to cut out the middle man.

This is not to say record labels are bad and should cease to exist. But it means that as fewer artists opt into the major label system, those labels are going to have to sink or swim. They'll either have to accommodate the wishes of artists who are tired of being confined to whatever is best suited for mass consumption, or they'll fold. And if the major labels fold, prevailing attitudes in the industry are going to change. The very backbone of the GMA will change - either because those people will learn to think differently about how they do business, or because those people will leave the business altogether. This could take a while, because I can see the Nashville bigwigs stubbornly holding onto tradition and refusing to realizing it's not working. But eventually it's just plain not going to be profitable any more. And then even the people who mean well and just want to support the ministry of Christian musicians and don't care about getting rich will realize that they have to think differently if they want to keep their jobs and feed their families.

NP: "My Girls", Animal Collective

[bethany]

Huh. Apparently some guys from my hometown in Nebraska are up for best new artist (Remedy Drive). I haven't heard them play in literally years, but they weren't very impressive back in the day. Not that a Dove award nomination exactly implies that they've gotten any better. But kind of cool. A friend of mine is married to one of the band members.

[ajyouthguy]

this doesn't directly relate to the Doves, but I didn't want to start a new topic for it.  CCM online's reader's choice awards were announced today and in case anyone is interested here is what won...

http://www.salememail.com/specialoffers/CCMReadersChoice2009/

[murlough23]

this doesn't directly relate to the Doves, but I didn't want to start a new topic for it.  CCM online's reader's choice awards were announced today and in case anyone is interested here is what won...

http://www.salememail.com/specialoffers/CCMReadersChoice2009/

Same old bullshit. The only artists I even remotely still care about on that list is Lifehouse, and they haven't done anything in 2 years.

[chrisnu]

Toby Mac for Best Male Artist... he's turned into a bizarro version of the character from "My Friend (So Long)". This phase might be understandable if he were in his twenties, by Mr. McKeehan is 45 years old.

[murlough23]

Toby Mac for Best Male Artist... he's turned into a bizarro version of the character from "My Friend (So Long)". This phase might be understandable if he were in his twenties, by Mr. McKeehan is 45 years old.

I've pointed out before that your age shouldn't make the genre of music that you like making off-limits. If Toby wants to continue making poppy hip-hop music, he has every right to do this. What makes it bad is not the style of music, but his apparent lack of awareness that the quality of his lyrics is iffy and the youth who make us his core audience are going to quickly grow out of his music.

NP: "Half Our Lives", Sanctus Real feat. Katie Herzig

[NinjaRob17]

this doesn't directly relate to the Doves, but I didn't want to start a new topic for it.  CCM online's reader's choice awards were announced today and in case anyone is interested here is what won...

http://www.salememail.com/specialoffers/CCMReadersChoice2009/

FF5 most underrated artist? Why? If anything they're vastly overrated.

[bloop]

I've pointed out before that your age shouldn't make the genre of music that you like making off-limits. If Toby wants to continue making poppy hip-hop music, he has every right to do this. What makes it bad is not the style of music, but his apparent lack of awareness that the quality of his lyrics is iffy and the youth who make us his core audience are going to quickly grow out of his music.

NP: "Half Our Lives", Sanctus Real feat. Katie Herzig

This is a polite way of saying that his music is little more than a target marketing scheme.

[murlough23]

This is a polite way of saying that his music is little more than a target marketing scheme.

It might be in his case. I just don't want to misidentify the problem.

I think there's just cause to criticize Toby's music from a lyrical standpoint, and perhaps there's also the issue of it getting watered down and poppy to the point where it's a misnomer to market it as hip-hop. However, on that second issue, he's making the kind of music he likes making, and it's more that the industry's to blame for not knowing the difference between that and "real" hip-hop music, to the point where more qualified artists are getting little or no attention because a generation of CCM listeners thinks Toby's music is what rap is supposed to sound like or whatever. Sometimes I enjoy it for what it is, but it irks me when it's recognized as something that it isn't.

However, that's all separate from the complaint that he's too old to be making a certain kind of music. I resent and reject the notion that you're ever too old or too young to listen to or make the kind of music that you love. (You should simply be doing it well without your youth or your advancing years serving as a cushion for criticism. "It's good rap-metal music, for an old fart" or "It's good jazz, for a teenager" doesn't cut it if it's not good music when the age of the artist isn't taken into account.)

[bloop]

I agree that style should be age-neutral, but there are some lyrics that I can't buy a 45 year old singing from where they are in their age and stage.

[murlough23]

I agree that style should be age-neutral, but there are some lyrics that I can't buy a 45 year old singing from where they are in their age and stage.

Yes. The issue here is lyrics.

And even if it's a case of an adult intentionally trying to write lyrics that teens can relate to, honestly, I don't think teens are that dumb.

[ajyouthguy]

this is not Dove awards, but i didn't want to start another thread for it.  if it needs to be made one, someone can do so, but i thought it was interesting.  this article is on CT's website as of today.  interesting read.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/music/commentaries/2009/musicinrecession.html?start=1

[murlough23]

Thanks for the article, AJ. I think this recession is actually going to do good things for Christian music. I'm surprised that so many people seem to think an artist must always be doing music as a full-time job for their ministry to be valid. I just assumed a lot of the smaller-time artists I listened to had day jobs. I figured there was no way it paid the bills for them, unless they had an incredibly devoted fanbase who would turn out at concerts when they toured. I know some of my favorite bands are small-time and maybe they can't come out to L.A. or whatever. That's just the model they have to work with. They have to keep it local and only spend the money and time to travel if they know they have the fanbase and interest in other places.

I think a lot of things could change for an artist if they accept that music isn't going to be their primary source of income. Suddenly you don't have the pressure to make hits to keep a label happy and keep your contract, because even if you make an album nobody gets and the whole thing tanks, you still have your regular job and you can feed your family. Music becomes something you do on the side because you love it. I guess there's the issue of having enough time for it, but I'd rather it be a labor of love than a labor of necessity. Plus so many artists are able to record good stuff in their home studios (or just their homes!) nowadays and get it out there on the Internet rather cheaply, because the cost of recording stuff comes way down if you don't need a fancy studio and session players and hired gun songwriters and a big-name producer, and you don't have to spend a ton of money reproducing as many physical copies of the music. I like that the recession is forcing artists to consider changing their model.

I don't rejoice at the thought of anyone being out of a job, but I think some of these folks in the record label and radio business who do have genuine talent could use the excuse to break out of the old industry mindset, and focus their efforts on music that matters even if it's on a smaller scale. Some of those big labels and radio stations are going to have to shut their doors or at least be forced to stop spending so much on hype that deflates within a matter of weeks. That's what's wasting a lot of the money from where I stand - a big push to try to make some overblown pretty face "the next big thing" when there's no substance, and then bailing out on that artist when the desired response doesn't happen. You can market and distribute music very cheaply - or sometimes even for free- over the Internet if you know how to get a grassroots movement going. Doing that requires quality music. The artist will probably never become a big star, but if you're comfortable with that and you're just trying to help them find an audience who will appreciate good music for what it is, I think some very fruitful partnerships can be made there, without the big Nashville PR machine needing to be all abuzz over it.