I concur. The performance didn't have the sound quality that one would expect. And, if you watched closely, you could see the disappointment run across my favorite gospel music artist--Hezekiah Walker's face. Perfecting type of musicians such as Hez will always be the first to tell.

Re: Alicia Keys
 

Amen. I think India is too eth'nick (lol) for 'em. Alicia is the NON-threatening one. :rolleyes:

India got snubbed at the Image awards too.
Like Jamie Foxx said, we (blacks) are hard to please. We're our own worst critic.

Re: Re: Alicia Keys
 

My friends and I were just talking about this! I feel that Alicia was a bit more "marketable" and trendy (how many women were sporting Alicia like cornrows afterward?). I feel she's very talented but MTV wore this girls videos out! Now India's videos have BEEN out. They're just starting to really play the other two(Video being her first) since her nomination. Her CD was very powerful, and didn't get half as much play as it should have.


Let me ask this.....If India was a bit more......."cute" do you think she would have gotten more recognition?

Re: Re: Re: Alicia Keys
 

I'm sure I'm "dating" myself....but who else realizes that Alicia Keys is Patrice "Baby Fingers" Rushen, re-born?

Everything old IS new again!

Miss Keys
 

I think so b/c if she were "cuter" by conventional standards she would be more marketable (ie "cross-over material). It also has to do with India's music not being as "cross-over", IMO, as Alicia's is...But you do have to admit that Miss Keys does have some great PR Reps b/c that chile's face is er'where!

No your not datin yourself, b/c I'm a youngin' up in hea' but I know who Patrice Rushen is...Anyway, Patrice was MUCH MORE talented than Alicia Keys--shoot, she played like 4 or 5 instruments!!!

My thoughts
 

This topic dominated a listserve I am on for the ENTIRE day after the GRAMMYS. I chose not to share my thoughts with them because a good majority of the members of that list can get downright IGNANT in my opinion, but I digress.

This time last year, a lot of us were saying that JILL SCOTT had been robbed. Over 90% of this GC family was FEEEEEEELING JILL and we were pissed that sista girl had been snubbed repeatedly. Now interestingly enough, some people do not find JILL attractive but I think she is downright gorgeous. Sure she is THICK -- cool I love it.

SOMEONE on the list calls India a ferret and a lot of the men call her ugly but y'all the more I look at her I see her beauty both the internal and external. Her songs were UPLIFTING. I don't know about y'all but I SEE GOD in YOU among others were dang near gospel.

NOW as to why ALICIA won over INDIA -- a lot of things contributed to that. She was out there -- hell she walked beside me in Indianapolis :p. The covers of mags, TV performances -- shoot she will show up this season too. Plus she is bi-racial and she is pulling 2 audiences. Her music is good -- I DID BUY it and rocked to it. ALICIA won this year, cleaned up -- you go girl but y'all it was bound to happen and will continue to happen that BLACK folks are going to be competing more and more against each other in these awards. I long for the day though where it is not a clean sweep of the SAME ARTIST but instead the SAME RACE!!

Re: My thoughts
 

I hate to say it, but this sounds like the topic turned to "light v. dark" skinned women and our perception of beauty. I think India.Arie and Jill Scott are beautiful! India looks like a queen, and Jill WAS one of People's 50 most beautiful. I thought it was about time they recognized us voluptuous women!

India, Jill and Alicia are each beautiful and talented in their own way. I really feel that Motown slept on India's marketing. She actually has crossover appeal (Oprah appearance, Today Show appearance w/ John Mellancamp, airplay on VHI, MTV and BET) but they didn't play her up. She could have easily appeared on Rosie, Regis & Kelly, etc, but as far as I know it didn't happen. If India was with J Records with Clive Davis, I think we would be looking at a TOTALLY different picture.

AND JILL SCOTT WAS ROBBED LAST YEAR! NO IFS ANDS OR BUTS!

I think I am in the minority here. For the first time I really enjoyed the grammy awards. :D . I agree that India Arie was robbed. I think that here album has much more substance than Alicia Keys. They are both talented women and they come to the music spectrum from different angles and they should have been rewarded equally. Unfortunately like someone already mentioned, Motown is HORRIBLE in their marketing. They truly need to take a lesson from Clive Davis.

Mary RIPPED it!!!http://www.plauder-smilies.de/happy/xyxthumbs.gif...NUF SAID!!

Nelly...Ghetto!!

Enigma..oops I mean Pink does look like a poster child for an STD:eek: .

Beyonce and 'em sounded very nice but I was a little tired of seeing Beyonce shaking that weave and trying to upstage everyone.

I love OUTKAST as much as the next person but Dre was OUT OF CONTROL with that pink outfit and those SHINE AZZ SHOES :eek: !!

Alicia's performance was the BOMB...and I especially loved that flamenco dancer!!!!

I couldn't help but be tickled over the PWT/Bluegrass version of the WU-TANG Clan. I admit I do love the song that one and the movie O Brother Where Art Thou. Being an open minded person, it was nice to see this type of music get a little props.

Finally, I really loved Billy Joel and Tony Bennett's tribute to New York. I am an old soul and a NATIVE NEW YORKER. The song was also sentimental because it reminded me of listening to old record with my aunt as a kid. ;) .

AND THEY REALLY NEED TO BRING BACK ROSIE!!!

Re: Re: My thoughts
 

Yes it is a "light" v. "dark" issue -- I did not make it that way but that is a sub component of the India versus Alicia as well.

We are going to constantly see it that way. It is not a hypothesis but the truth. Yes INDIA is marketable but her company and PR people did not do their job as well as ALICIA's did.

Plus Alicia has more of a crossover appeal than India does. While our people and our nation needs more of what India's music offers, A MESSAGE, they are not as accepting of it as they should be.

Re: Re: My thoughts
 

VirtualViolet, I don't know about that, because Angie Stone is on J Records and even though they tried to pull her in with Alicia on those shows doing the remix of "Brotha" she still hasn't gotten her just due after all these years.

Gotta agree about Motown's marketing. Brian Mcknight. Erykah Badu. India Arie.

All AMAZING artists. All WAAAAAAAAY under-publicized for their ginormous talents. I heard that India.Arie did not want to do PR the same way that ALicia Keys does. She wants her music to sell itself, not her face or her body. I understand that but the track record of this company with their other artists gives me pause. There ARE other ways to get an artist out there and they are just not doing it at all.

But then again, Alicia Keys has Clive Davis behind her. THere aren't many executives anywhere who could give an artist the kind of exposure that he can.

But they could still do betta!:)

Hey all,

I agree w/ what Sugar_N_Spice said:
I was just thinking how I really don't think that India's music is marketable towards non-black people. Take for example her song "Brown Skin". A woman of non-black decent is not going to be able to relate to that. Or take Angie Stone's "Brotha"....um, will white/latin/asian women be able to relate to this? Perhaps...if they are into black men.....but I really don't think they'd truly be able to feel the message it presents like black women will. So I think it makes sense that people are going to buy what they can relate to. With that in mind.....although the PR behind India is not that great, if she's "marketable" (I think everyone can be marketable), given her music, would her PR been able to market her outside the black community? Hmmmm

Another thought I had was what IF India does NOT want her music to be marketed towards either a specific ethnic group or towards people who listen to other genres of music? I don't know, I'm just looking at it from another level. I say this b/c everyone has an audience they are trying to reach. Some artists try to reach EVERYONE (or whoever will listen :p). But there are some out there that may want to only reach certain people/ethnic groups. And if that's the case, why would their PR ppl market them towards EVERYONE? Why not just market towards the ppl the artist wants to reach? Now, I don't think India is trying to just reach certain people (i.e. black people, people who listen to r&b/soul), but considering her songs, it's a good possibility. Think about Angie Stone, Musiq Soulchild, Bilal, Eryka Badu and so on. Who do you think they are trying to reach? Once you think about that, think of where they are marketed. However, with Alicia, I don't think she's trying to reach certain groups b/c she's EVERYWHERE! I think anyone could like her music, even if she were marketed just to one particular group. But I don't think just anyone could like Bilal or Eryka. It's possible, but 9 out of 10 listeners are probably going to be from one group. But maybe that's what they want....only they know for sure.
Just some thoughts. Hope they made some kind of sense :) :cool:

Grammy Awards Show: Airs Feb. 27th
 

Hello Everyone,

I have to say this year I really did not find the Grammys that entertaining :(. I think that it was more because of the host (Stewart). He was horrible! But I thought the Image Awards were great! :) It was wonderful to see all of the best and brightest black talent under one roof!! :) I also have to agree that I felt so sorry for India. I have her album as well and it is fantastic. I had tears in my eyes, because I could not believe that she did'nt win a thing from the Grammys or the Image Awards. My sister was just saying that if she looked more like Keys then she would have won something. But as I read through the posts the same idea was brought up. Who really knows?? But it is possible.
I remember when Jill Scott was on Oprah and she said that she would send her tapes out to record companies, without her picture. And I thought that was a damn shame, because she is a beautiful black woman. But image still dominates over true talent.

I was very disappointed with India not winning because the Grammy's (unlike The MTV awards for instance) is supposed to reward SUBSTANCE over STYLE. The Grammy's are supposed to recognize artists who may not have had commercial success but have true talent. People with little talent like Britney Spears and JLo don't win Grammy's just because their face is everywhere. Now Alicia is VERY talented, but I don't think she deserved 5 Grammy's ala Lauryn Hill. Lauryn's CD was PHENOMENAL and Alicia's can't even compare.

Slightly off subject, ...re: Prince
 

NEW THREAD STARTED...