There Isn’t Much Fun to be Had From Awards, it Seems
 There have been a few baubles dished out this week, some shiny and some distinctly tatty, and I have to confess that from a barely-interested outsider’s perspective, it’s been pretty funny.
Even the Mercury Prize result, which I was kinda disappointed in because my pal didn’t win, created all sorts of comedy on Twitter and elsewhere. The best was probably The Pop Cop’s hilarious rant about the Scottish New Music Awards.
Now, I wasn’t there, but looking at the results alone, they must have been pretty fucking hilarious. Sandy Thom? Record of the year something which hasn’t even been released yet? Best covers band? Sandy Thom?
Not having attended I have no idea how cringeworthy or awful it might actually have been in reality, but it is only the first year, and nothing of this sort is going to be perfect the first time around, so they do deserve a bit of slack. But any new music award whose ceremony is compered by some X-Factor reject has at least one or two fundamental questions to be asked about it.
As for the Mercury Prize, well, as I freely admitted on Twitter in amongst all the hubbub, I wanted King Creosote to win for two reasons. Firstly, he is a pal. Not a close pal, but a pal nevertheless, and a nice guy. And secondly, it’s pretty much the only album on that list that I know all that well. You see what I mean by how little interest I actually had in any of these awards?
The chat after the Mercury Prize was interesting, some people accepted the result with resignation, some with good grace, and others with outrage at the corruption or ineptitude of the judges. Mike Diver wrote a really good piece about it all on the BBC website, actually, pointing out that something as artistically focussed as the Mercury Prize is really good for music irrespective of your opinion on the final winner.
The arguments about the winner, the debate about the shortlist, the countless alternative lists, the bafflement at some of the nominations – all of this generates massive interest in music. Actual interest too, and proper engagement in the art, rather than the tawdry commercialism and cultural vaccuum of the Brits. For example, I am now going to make an effort to see if my historical ambivalence towards PJ Harvey actually holds up under closer scrutiny
He wasn’t quite right about the entry process though, and inaccurately trivialised how prohibitive the submission costs are for small labels. The £200 he quotes (it was £500 last time I was invited to submit anything) is a bargain for all the publicity a Mercury nomination generates, but it is a little more considerable when you consider the statistical likelihood of actually achieving that nomination.
£500 and a large pile of actual albums for the judges to listen to is a lot of money to throw down the drain on the off-chance, especially if you have a few releases that year which you might wish to nominate. Even at £200 I would think twice about it, depending on how many albums I had to nominate for that year, but then again we are a tiny, tiny label and probably a wee way away from seriously having to worry about this sort of shit.
In terms of the actual decision, though, the combination of the Scottish New Music Awards and the Mercury Prize in the same week highlights the problem with taking any of this shit seriously at all. These awards are decided by either large or small groups of people, public vote or committee decision.
When it’s a small group of people then it’s basically some random yahoo passing judgement on your work, and why the fuck would you care what some random asshole thinks of your shit? Even if one of my heroes thought the music we released was shite, would that bother me? Of course it wouldn’t, I’d just file their opinions under ‘not interesting’ and get right back on with it.
But if you broaden these things away from an exclusive cabal of decision makers then you get the situation Diver discusses in his article: of course the Mercury Prize is kinda populist – it’s decided by committee, and anything really obscure and challenging is unlikely to attract the attention of more than a couple of people, making it highly unlikely that it will be nominated. I fucking hate 99% of music which is actually properly popular, so why would populism be a criterion on which I would ever judge my own work? It isn’t, so fuck it.
So either way you lose: small numbers of people make decisions which are too subjective, and if you try and negate that by making it more democratic then you just end up with predictable populist tripe.
The only reason that I can think of that we don’t discard this whole bollocks and walk away altogether is that almost none of us can resist the little teeny-tiny thrill of piqued vanity when we are either nominated or agree wholeheartedly with a nomination. We are being validated one way or another, either for being right or for being awesome, and most of us really can’t resist that, so award ceremonies will persist and probably even proliferate for the foreseeable future.
‘You know that new girl? She’s such a stuck-up bitch, and she’s not even all that pretty, and she’s so dumb, did you hear what she…”
“You don’t like her? She told me she thought you were kinda cute.”
“…what she said in English toda… wait, what, she said I was cute?”





