(but not the Grammys)
The world is mad at Taylor Swift. Yes, again. Cue the all-too-expected (and yet, still wildly disappointing) online discourse surrounding T-Swift after the Grammys. On Sunday night, Swift took home Album of the Year, her 13th Grammy, and to the surprise of absolutely no one, the Internet had something to say about it.
An essay published in Culture Study touches on the reasons people are mad at Taylor Swift following the Grammy’s, attributing much of this anger to her notoriety and a perceived lack of acknowledgement to her privilege. Of course, there’s many annoyances to cover here, so let’s dive in.
The Celine-Dion of it All
To begin, many people took issue with Taylor Swift’s perceived slight at Celine Dion, whose defense they came to on social media at the perceived disrespect. The horrible slight in question? Swift’s failure to acknowledge Celine during her acceptance speech. Though the two were photographed after the fact (see the pair of smiling faces above), people still insisted on taking issue with the moment. However, this situation begs the question: how much do celebrities, or winners of any award in fact, owe to their presenters? In other words, until every winner acknowledges their presenters, setting that precedent, anger at a failure to do so suggests picking and choosing who to criticize.
Clearly, the two have an established discourse off of the stage, but people feel owed a specific, public (and impossible) expression of gratitude by Swift. As Peterson aptly puts, Swift’s level of fame means “honest missteps become weaponized, [t]he interpersonal comes to feel emblematic, [and] every move becomes overdetermined.” To this end, Swift’s failure to acknowledge Dion then takes on a deeper meaning and deeper consequence in the eyes of the public, leaving her no room to err.
Further, factor in the fact that many fans were upset at her dragging Lana Del Ray onto stage, aiming to give her some recognition following her snub. People call out Swift for failing to acknowledge the successes of others but call her out when she tries to, proving Peterson’s evaluation that every action, no matter the result or intention, takes on meaning and subsequent scrutiny. Considering the internet sees no acceptable way for her to act, given the weight of her influence, I think she deserves a bit of grace. More to the point, considering speeches are designated for the winners of awards to use as they please, Swift deserves to use the time as she sees fit. Which leads me to my next point…
The Album Announcement
The announcement of her new album, another point of contention I’ve seen all over social media the past few days, has undoubtedly put a bad taste in people’s mouths. Why? Well, if you ask me, there’s no fair answer to that question either. As Peterson points out in the article, many feel it was an inappropriate time and place, as “the Grammys understands itself as a celebration of other artists, not a promotional tool”. Importantly, the article also recognizes this concept as a “fiction”. Considering the Grammys award show is in and of itself a promotional tool for the music industry, Swift’s actions cannot then sully an ethical standard that just doesn’t exist.
Others seemed annoyed at her announcement in lieu of her continued (and not always earned) domination of the field. However, again, all of these frustrations seem like a displacement of anger, as well as inherently contradictory. That’s all to say, while systemic issues and privileges have historically and undeniably altered the results of award shows like the Grammys and the Oscars, those organizations are ultimately responsible for those issues. While she arguably reaps the most benefits of the Grammys’ current system, she did not create it, nor does it become her sole responsibility to fix it.
When misattributing the blame, typically to the women who do manage to succeed in male-dominated fields, we only disvalue the progress that has been made while failing to create any true change within these organizations. It doesn’t seem fair to recognize the shortcomings of the Grammys while simultaneously attempting to force women to uphold a code of ethics that simply does not exist.
The Double Standard
Of course, many praised Jay-Z’s call-out of the Grammy’s for snubbing Beyonce, keeping with its tradition of undervaluing the work of artists of color. However, while there is undeniable truth in his points on racial bias, if there really was a certain code-of-conduct or etiquette to Grammy speeches, Jay-Z’s certainly would have violated it. Here too, I see absolutely no issue with him taking his time up however he wants. I do take issue with the unfair precedent that this internet praise sets, however, as Swift and other women’s use of their time seems to become one angry news headline or another after every award show. No matter what women say(or don’t say), the public opinion on how they choose to use their time when they reach a particular level of fame always differs from that on speeches of male artists.
The Solution
Unfortunately, no solution seems particularly likely to fixing the unfortunate discourse that follows award shows. Women, particularly those with Swift’s notoriety, power, and privilege, seem to be the easiest targets for this discourse. Peterson describes this effect as follows: “no matter how many people love you, there comes a point when the structure of a star image cannot shoulder the weight of the star’s meaning and import.” In the end, it all relates to the bigger question of just how much celebrities owe to others in their presentation to the public and, in turn what we owe celebrities concerning our online discourse. Leave your thoughts and questions down below!