Dear Grammy, Is It Hawaiian Enough?

Thanks for the link, that was a very interesting article.

For those who don't know, in the photo of Ho'okena -- their bass player is Kamaka ukulele's Chris Kamaka.
DANIELHO-2-articleInline-v2.jpg


Plus, how drool worthy is Daniel Ho's KoAloha uke? I really wish they used that bridge style on their tenors instead of the bowtie one.
DANIELHO-5-popup.jpg
 
Daniel is a might drool worthy too, lol.

Totally agree on the bridge, that would be a decider for me.
 
I wonder if the real debate goes back to the original concept: should Hawaiian music be given its own category? If it should, then it follows that the Grammy voters will in some sense define what the public perceives as "Hawaiian" music. You can't tell them to have the category, then tell them who to choose as the winner. And how many of us have struggled with stereotypes surrounding our own forays into the sound world of Hawaii? And of course, is there any longer an authentic Hawaiian music? (Insert your favourite ethnomusicological arguments - most likely centring on Madeira around this forum)

And does this sort of category detract from the other heroes of Hawaiian music, like Jake and Ohta-san, neither of whom would ever be likely to win a Grammy in this category(?!)?

Doesn't this award merely put Hawaiian music back into its cute little hula dancing dashboard mounted form?

Wasn't there just a whole other thread about apparent do-gooding leading to unintended, but actual harm? Hmmmmmmmmmmm...
 
Last edited:
bridge

The folks at Koaloha are very flexible. If you request that bridge, you'll get it. And it won't be like waiting on a full custom. You won't get instant gratification, but they will accomodate. And I should know about instant gratification. I ordered a full custom from Paul in 2006 and will be receiving it in a couple of weeks. Trust me though, its way good, and well worth the wait. The journey has been awesome corresponding back and forth with Paul. He is a class AA person. Well then again, the whole family is. I can't wait to meet them in person in a couple of years.

Scott

P.S. Wicked Wahine--so weird, I read your online blog for the first time last night, then joined UU this morning, then POW here you are.
 
LOL. Grammys... please. If anyone thinks they're representative of the "best" of anything, you must be living under a rock and only listening to your local "hit music" station... So I wouldn't take offense to anything as far as categories, nominations and winners go... just sayin ;)
 

Ouch! http://www.midweek.com/content/columns/newsmaker_article/GRAMMY_Cyril_Pahinui/

This seems to be, at least in part, a debate about whether Hawaiian music is Hawaiian because it reflects the Hawaiian music cultural tradition or because it is made by people who live, create and perform in Hawai'i. It also sounds like Daniel Ho qand people associated with him are perceived by many as being mainland music insiders. I don't know anything about any of this, and I have no skin in this game, but I suspect that this Grammy Award fight is merely bringing to the surface some long-simmering stuff among people who are making Hawaiian music.
 
poho the grammys. most these guys never say nothin til now time, how many years is that? but when they do, cause they know/feel the results not pono, their "aloha spirit" is questioned. how you figga questioning one hawaiian's aloha? more and more i believe aloha spirit was just made up for keep hawaiians and local people from making noise.
 
As someone who spent ten years working in the recording industry, I may be able to offer a little insight into how the Grammy Awards actually work.

As defined by The Recording Academy:

The GRAMMYs are the only peer-presented award to honor artistic achievement, technical proficiency and overall excellence in the recording industry, without regard to album sales or chart position.

Many have complained that “Mainland voters are ignorant of Hawaiian music.” But as stated, voters are professionals in the recording arts. They judge musical quality, regardless of celebrity, residence, sales, air-play or race.
I suppose that depends on your definition of who's a "peer" or a "professional".

The article mentions "11,000-plus voting members" of NARAS. To become a voting member you must have "X" number of "technical or creative credits" on commercially released tracks.

While some artists certainly qualifies as "peers", there are many other voting members you probably hadn't thought about. A guy who works in the artwork department or writes liner notes gets a credit. It was typical for A&R reps to be given associate producer credit even if they never stepped foot into the studio for the recording.

And here's a real gem... handclaps. Yes, it was not uncommon for the label to round up a bunch of people to enter the studio to do handclaps on a track. Or whack a cowbell at the right time. I knew one secretary who got credit for a scream on a heavy metal track.

In short, the major record labels are known to pad their voting ranks. Offical memos are distributed with the label's nominees and employees are encouraged to vote the party line.

Now, I was never a voting member of NARAS, but I was a voting member of a couple other associations that bestow awards and it worked the same way (my memberships were bought and paid for by the label I worked for). If a label had more than one nominee in a category, the powers that be decided who they wanted to win and encouraged you to vote for that artist.

Of course, when push comes to shove, there's no one standing over you as you fill out your ballot. I always voted my conscience.

According to Wikipedia, "After nominees have been determined, final voting ballots are sent to Recording Academy members. They may then vote in the general fields and in no more than eight of the 30 fields. NARAS members are encouraged, but not required, to vote only in their fields of expertise."

So that guy who does artwork or liner notes for classical releases (or who handclapped their way into a voting membership paid for by the company) can vote in numerous fields, none of which involve any of his expertise.

This is where name recognition comes in. Tia Carrere is a known commodity as an actress as well as a singer and she definitely has an advantage there.

It's like in elections, there is no qualification to vote (aside from being registered). I always try to do my homework and if there's a particular race or issue I don't know enough about to make an informed decision, then I'll skip voting on it. But a lot of people probably just look at candidate names and automatically vote for one based on perceived ethnicity or name recognition.

And that's what happens with Grammy voting as well. I can understand the backlash against Justin Bieber, as most of the voting members probably consider themselves more sophisticated than to vote for some teeny-bopper star.

In the recent NBA All-Star weekend, Bieber won MVP for the celebrity game, based solely on his fans voting for him. That's not a fair vote either.
 
Thanks, itsme, for the information and the insight into the process.
 
Top Bottom